Unresolved Kashmir Question &

Transcription

1 Magzter.com ISSN U.S. Library of Congress No A Premier Indo-Centric Foreign Affairs Journal Since 1980 PEER REVIEWED / REFEREED RESEARCH JOURNAL JULY 2017 n o i t i d E l a Speci Unresolved Kashmir Question & Special Edition Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) Shifting Lines, Drifting Borders: The Story of India s Border Conflicts British India's Unfinished Agenda Growing Chinese Influence in Pakistan One Belt One Road (OBOR) China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) Will Modi & Sharif be able to do anything concrete & Will they take this Kashmir issue to a logical conclusion? To Reach this location scan Here QR code /WorldFocus.In /WorldFocusIn 100 US $ 17 Turmoil in Europe & India-EU Ties

2

3 PEER REVIEWED / REFEREED RESEARCH JOURNAL Volume XXXVIII Number 7 July 2017 G. Kishore Babu Editor Bhabani Dikshit Managing Editor Stuti S. Mandala Associate Editor WORLD FOCUS takes up every month one international issue and gives an analysis of its various aspects by persons well known for their specialisation in the subject. The issues covered are topical or near topical, but of an abiding interest. The analysis is simple enough to interest even an initiate to world affairs, but without sacrificing depth. The aim is to present an Indocentric view on a particular issue currently facing the world. Opinions expressed in the articles are personal views of the author and in no way reflect the opinion of World Focus. The author is solely responsible for the contents in his/ her article and the World Focus takes no responsibility in this regard. The Contents of this magazine cannot be reproduced in any form with out prior permission from World Focus. Any legal issues pertaining to World Focus will be settled in NCT region of Delhi only. Unsolicited articles will not be returned or acknowledged. World Focus reserves the right to edit articles for brevity and clarity before publication. Edited, Owned, Published and Printed by G. Kishore Babu from B-49 (Ground Floor), Joshi Colony, I.P. Extension, Delhi at Madhav Press, 4857/24, First Floor, Ansari Road, Dariyaganj, New Delhi Total number of Pages 146, including Covers Copy Right : World Focus Our Address: World Focus B-49, (Ground Floor) Joshi Colony, I P Extension Delhi , India Tel. / Fax : , Mobile No cnfworldfocus@gmail.com Website: EDITORIAL For the first time in 70 years India is looking at what is good for the country without fear of upsetting anyone. Today the Modi government has shown a method in the vision of trade of not participating in the One Belt One Road Summit in Beijing on a principled stand. This whole exercise by China is to see that the entire region is free from being the hotbed of terrorism, in return the entire area is getting infrastructure connectivity. Pakistan border regions Afghanistan and the Central Asia region need funds for development China by entering the area and developing it with the Army standing by to get work done is giving Pakistan no reason to Nurture terrorism. Nawaz Sharif is getting development done in the region, by the Chinese to whom neither his army nor anyone else can say anything. He too by this will see Pakistan turning a new leaf in its growth story. The army will soon stop calling the shorts once the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor is done. With China it is a perception issue, for India if the conditions are right can always join the Belt and Road Initiative. India by working with Japan and Isreal will be the Infrastructure builder of all the projects with a win-win relationship with both Japan and Israel. This is an equal alliance of brain, power and a will to go forward. Japan and Israel have the technology we need in all fields. They get a good market for their products whether it is infrastructure hardware or electronic hardware or Nuclear know how. With Japan India will soon launch the development of Asia and Africa in the upcoming Annual meeting of African Development Bank. To be held at Ahmadabad this will be India s answer to China s OBOR. This is the biggest success of the Modi Foreign policy initiatives. For the first time the Russians are being told that getting business in the civil nuclear programme development in developing the Kundankulam 5 and 6 reactors are linked to Indian foreign policy goals. Today we are world leaders in Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors (PHWR). Now we are putting up 10 reactors of 700MW capacity, it is a salute to Indigenous technology. We need Nuclear Suppliers Group membership it is said we have told the Russians that, do what it needs to get us the membership and come back. This is braveness that Indian foreign policy has not shown till now. All want peace and freedom from terrorism. New Delhi G. Kishore Babu July 2017 Editor 3

4 Pak Occupied Kashmir & India Contents Creation of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Present Scenerio Anil Kamboj Inspector General (Retd)...5 Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: Perspectives Prof. Snehalata Panda...14 Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) & India Dr. SudhanshuTripathi...21 Trilateral Solution to the Kashmir Issue: Not Bilateral! G. Kishore Babu...28 Confidence Building Measures Travel and Trade Across LOC Dr. B. Srinivas, IPS...30 Ghulam Kashmir: India s Diplomatic Gambit Imperatives for an Action-Oriented Policy Intervention Dr. Alok Kumar Gupta...36 Prognosis of Kashmir Crisis: Hobsonean Choice? Dr. Gauri Sankar Nag & Dr. Sajal Basu...45 Turbulence in PoK: The China Factor Dr. Netajee Abhinandan...51 India, PoK and CPEC: Narrowing the Corridor of Indo-Pakistan Relations Dr. Mohor Chakraborty...55 Strategic Shift in Modi s Pakistan Policy and POK: The Challenges Ahead Dr. Saleem Ahmad & Dr. Khushbu Gupta...61 OBOR through POK: A Threat to India s Foreign Policy Snehil Kacker...68 Impact of Pak Occupied Kashmir on Indian Economy Dr. Aparna Banerjee...73 Terror Infrastructure in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: India s Security Concerns Dr. Prasanta Sahoo...80 Pak-Occupied Kashmir and India: Can China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) resolve this problem? Dr. Pitam Ghosh...88 The Contested Notion of PoK and Concerns for Regional Prosperity Pankaj Lakhera...95 Geo-Politics of Gilgit-Baltistan: India and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Shivani Sharma State Sponsored Terrorism in India: Why India s Conducted Surgical Strikes in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir? Afroz Ahmad & Jahangir Ahmad Khan Contrasting Development: A Study of Economic Realities of India and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) Parul Khatri & Charu Khatri The China led One Belt One Road in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: Implications for India Manisha Chaurasiya Rehabilitation Policy: A Field Study of PoK Returnee Militants Arif Hussain Malik & Toseef Ahmad Bhat Growing Presence of China in Pak Occupied Kashmir and India s Concerns Shobhit Kumar Jain Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: A Case of Prolonged Negligence Vijay Kumar Yadav World Focus July 2017

5 Creation of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Present Scenerio Anil Kamboj \Introduction I know that most of the readers must be aware about the background of creation of Pakistan occupied Kashmir. But, yet I again want to bring out some of the facts about today s problem in that part of India, because it gives me lot of pain when almost every day I read that how our brave Security Forces are facing the situation in Kashmir both on the borders and as well inside. They are working day in and day out under most inhospitable situations while living under inhuman conditions. The paper argues that what were the circumstances and compulsions that created POK, or could it be avoided. Paper would also try to find its after effects and present scenario. Background Background in brief as to how the British created India and Pakistan must be understood before understanding about Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, how it was created and how wrong is Pakistan s claim over Kashmir. The British had decided on Pakistan creation earlier in On 2 March, the Secretary of State, Amery, wrote to A. Harding that Here is the Document as drafted by the India Committee under Attlee s chairmanship. This was the same which Linlithgow and I (Amery) had agreed upon in July This was the first public admission of the possibility of Pakistan, that is, an India divided between the Muslim and Hindu parties. Further, on 24 March, Amery wrote to Linlithgow: Jinnah, I should have thought, will be content to realise that he has now got Pakistan, whether as something substantial or as a beginning point. 1 Partition of India was, thus, part of the imperial strategy Churchill had ordered to be prepared immediately on the surrender of Germany on 5 th May, It was to meet the grave apprehensions Russia was causing. Stalin had earlier told Hilter s Foreign Minister, Ribbenprop, that it was ridiculous that a few hundred Englishmen should dominate India. Churchill had concurred with his Chief-of-Staff, Ismay that if they evacuated India, nothing would remain to prevent Russian infiltration. 2 Churchill s long-term policy required to safeguard the strategic interests of the British Empire in India and the Indian Ocean. Russia had come to be looked upon as British Empire s most probable potential enemy. 3 Britain s priority was defence of India s western and north-western borders, adjoining Afghanistan and Russia. The former through Pakistan presented no problem, as Pakistan would be totally dependent on Britain in military matters. The latter posed a problem, as the territory was part of the Kashmir State, whose Hindu Maharaja, the British feared, might exceed to India. They played a clever game through the Gilgit Scouts, who were British and who controlled the region. On 30 th July 1947, when India and Pakistan were yet to become independent, all the British officers of the Gilgit Scouts opted to serve Pakistan. Thus on 31 st October 1947, the Gilgit Scouts installed a provisional government. On 4 th November, Major Brown hoisted the Pakistan flag in the lines of his command, and on 12 th November, an official styling himself as political agent arrived from Pakistan and established himself in Gilgit. 4 The implementation of imperial strategy comprised: 5 a) Reinforcing defence installations on Pakistan s north-western borders b) Detaching Baluchistan from India c) Ensuring fuel supplies for Naval vessels in the Indian Ocean, for which purpose Governor General Mountbatten had proposed to the foreign oil companies operating in India to d) consider two oil refineries, one each on the west and the east coasts of India e) A common Governor General for India and Pakistan f) An undivided Army under the command of a British Supreme Commander Creation of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Present Scenerio 5

6 However, the imperial strategy did not takeoff. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel did not agree of allowing the British to arbitrarily handover to Muhammad Ali Jinnah the whole of Punjab and Bengal. Jinnah also did not agree for his greed for power and status as he refused to accept common Governor General for India and Pakistan, and undivided Army. Churchill s exit as Prime Minster on losing the election, Attlee, his successor, lacked the courage to proceed with the plan. Partition of India was therefore the plan of Churchill. Jinnah was its implementer. There was absolute confidential in Churchill Jinnah links before India s independence. 6 As part of his imperial strategy, Churchill had even directed Jinnah s role at the Simla Conference in June-July Wavell gave the shape to the Churchill s plan, leading ultimately to the breakup of India into Hindustan and Pakistan. It was Sardar Patel who did not allow the creation of Princestan. During this period, the Congress leaders were kept in dark as most of the time they were in prison for nearly three years since August Creation of Pok If we turn pages of Indian history a bit more, in 1846, with the signing of the Treaties of Lahore and Amritsar, British conquest of Northern India was complete. Consolidation of the gains had yet to be undertaken. This seemed more difficult than the military victory in Kashmir, being isolated from the rest of the country. The British were worried about new developments across the State s borders with Russia. The British choice for a chieftain fell on one of the Maharaja Ranjit Singh s ablest generals, Gulab Singh, a Dogra from Jammu. He had been granted many estates by Maharaja Ranjit Singh including Jammu for conquering many hostile regions, among them Ladakh and Kashmir and therefore had been elevated to the status of a Raja by the Maharaja. The British found their interests bound up together with Raja Gulab Singh. By the way of reward, the British promoted him to the Throne in exchange of Seventy-Five Lakh Rupees. It was an Nazarana which Sheikh Abdullah too paid to Maharaja Hari Singh, on his release from prison in As per Times of India Archives 1886, The British Government transfers and makes over for ever, in independent possession, to Maharaja Gulab Singh and his heirs all the hilly or mountainous country, situated to eastward of river Indus and westward of river Ravee. The Treaty meant no more than handing over of Kashmir to Gulab Singh for ruling on their behalf. The British had posted a Resident in Kashmir under whose surveillance the Maharaja ruled. The sum of Rupees 75 lakh that Maharaja paid to the British was not a sell-out but Nazarana or a Tribute that Indian Princes paid to the paramount power under Wellesley s policy of subsidiary alliances which granted help in defence in difficult circumstances. In other words, the British Government will give aid to Maharaja Gulab Singh in protecting his territories from external enemies. That is what Wellesley had offered to other princes earlier. Before independence, sometime in July, the Governor General Mountbatten tried to persuade Maharaja of Kashmir to ascertain the will of the people of Kashmir and the accede to the Dominion of the people s choice. But the Maharaja invariably avoided the issue. Even during end of August Lord Ismay had gone to with instructions to advise him to hurry up and ascertain the will of the people. But probably Maharaja wanted to stay independent. 7 Pandit Nehru had blind faith in Sheikh Abdullah of Kashmir. He believed that fate of Kashmir was tied with close personal interests of Pandit Nehru. He believed that only Sheikh Abdullah could help in to solve the Kashmir problem. Pandit Nehru also thought that Sheikh Abdullah would be his anchor in the Muslim dominated valley. He also left the fate of Dogra Hindus of Jammu, Buddhists of Ladakh, ethnically different Muslims of the state from border areas, the Bakarwals, the Gujjars and Paharis; in the hands of Sheikh Abdullah. Surprisingly, Pandit Nehru had even told Kashmiri pandits at the annual session of the National Conference at Sopore in 1945, that if non-muslims wanted to live in Kashmir, they should join the National Conference of Abdullah. During May 1946, Nehru supported Abdullah s Quit Kashmir movement, an imitation of Mahatma Gandhi s Quit India movement of This was abusive and mischievous. 8 Actually, there was no comparison between Quit Kashmir agitation and Quit India movement. The Maharaja of Kashmir, a Dogra, was a son of the state and it was absurd to have asked him to quit Kashmir. 6 World Focus July 2017

7 During Quit Kashmir agitation, Abdullah had been arrested but Pandit Nehru got him released through Sardar Patel s mediation with Maharaja. On coming out of the prison, Sheikh Abdullah, called upon the Maharaja and offered him a Nazarana, as a token of his loyalty and assured the Maharaja of Kashmir his and his party s loyalty and support towards His Highness. After his resumption of power, Sheikh Abdullah forgot all the promises he made to the Maharaja and asked him to quit the valley and leave the Kashmiris alone to decide their future by themselves. In September 1947, despite knowing fully well the communal mindset of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, Pandit Nehru patronised him and insisted on he be made the Prime Minister before the accession which was not acceptable to the Maharaja. India and Pakistan got their Independence on 15 August and 14 August 1947 respectively. Sheikh Abdullah never lost an opportunity to repeat the myth that the British Empire had sold Kashmir to Maharaja Gulab Singh. He would always tell wrong things about the Maharaja to the Kashmiri Muslims. He used to tell that they were the slaves of Dogras from Jammu and that the Maharaja Hari Singh (son of Maharaja Gulab Singh) was not a son of the soil, and had no right to rule over them. Thus, the seeds of hatred between the Muslims and other religions of Kashmir were sown. Sheikh Abdullah therefore, demanded of Maharaja to leave Jammu and Kashmir with bag and baggage. This was revival of his Quit Kashmir demand of He succeeded in this with support from Pandit Nehru. This move was unconstitutional because: (i) The Indian Independence Act of the British Parliament, under which Britain had transferred power and Pakistan, had also given the Indian Princes the right to accede to India or Pakistan, or remain independent to join the Third Dominion the British wanted to create. (ii) India s presence in the Kashmir valley was only after the Maharaja acceded to India. It would not have been possible in its absence. Abdullah refused to admit it. (iii) Maharaja was entitled to be treated on par with other Princes. Sometime during latter half of October 1947, the Pakistan aided Tribal incursion started in Kashmir. The Maharaja s forces could not match them. There was massacre all over. The Government of North West Frontier Province had pushed Mahsuds and Wazirs into the Jhelum Valley. It was not until the 24 th October that reliable information had been received of tribal incursion, and detailed report was received only on the 25 th. Thus, the decision to send troops had not been taken until 26 th October, by which date the Maharaja had announced his intension of acceding to India. On 26 th Pandit Nehru informed PM of Pakistan Liaquat Ali Khan about this and his decision of sending Indian troops to Kashmir. During beginning of November people of Srinagar woke up to find that Pakistan backed tribal raiders were just about 4 Km from the city of Srinagar, amassing for their final assault. confident of capture of Srinagar, Jinnah was at Abbotabad expecting to ride in triumph into Kashmir. 9 It was a critical moment for Kashmir when Sardar Patel landed at Srinagar on 4 th November 1947 along with the Defence Minister Baldev Singh. After getting a detailed briefing from the Brigade Commander and other leaders there, Sardar Patel immediately on returning to Delhi, he briefed Pandit Nehru the Indian Prime Minister, and both agreed to immediately send troops to Kashmir including Artillery units. On reaching Srinagar, these Indian troops started pushing back the Tribal raiders sent by Pakistan. Had it not been for the Indian Army, Srinagar would have been looted and burnt to the ground. Later on 24 th July 1969, in a letter to Balraj Krishna, General Sir Roy Bucher, C-in C, Indian Army, wrote that his Commander-in-Chief General Sir Rob Lockhart, before Maharaja had acceded to India, had received information from the Governor of North West Frontier Province and his government were encouraging raiders to enter Kashmir and was giving them transport and other facilities. He further informed that Jinnah s attitude was indicated when he ordered General Gracey, C-in-C of Pakistan Army, to send a Brigade of Pakistani regular troops into Kashmir to catch up with the raiders. General Gracey reported these orders to Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck with the result he met Jinnah and had these orders cancelled. At one point of time Sardar Patel was quite in favour of partition but against plebiscite anywhere. To him possible partition seemed Creation of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Present Scenerio 7

8 to be for those parts of the State that is, north of river Jhelum and west of river Poonch to go to Pakistan, rest to India. Sardar Patel was of the opinion the new Frontiers should be easily seen and recognised both on the ground and on the maps. Sometime during February Indian Prime Minister Pandit Nehru called C-in-C of Indian Army and showed some marked maps portraying a possible division of Kashmir as between India and Pakistan. But nothing came out of that meeting as Kashmir Deputy Prime Minister Bakshi Gulam Mohd did not want Titwahl to go to Pakistan. 10 Sometime during March 1948 General Gracey C-in-C Pakistan Army informed Indian C-in- C General Roy Bucher that he thought cease- fire in Kashmir might be arranged. General Bucher informed Pandit Nehru. General Gracey spoke with his PM. A cease-fire did occur but it could not be sustained as Pakistan Prime Minister wished that Pandit Nehru to treat or talk with the Government established in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir which they called as Azad Government (or Azad Kashmir). This was not possible as India did not recognise any such government. The fighting began again and the initiative taken by India was lost. Accordingly, General Roy wrote back to his counterpart It is sad that your Prime Minister could not find an approach to the Governor here. 11 On 10 th August 1948, General Sir Roy Bucher, C-in-C Indian Army, had written to his daughter, Elizabeth, that elements of Pakistan Regular Army were taking part in fighting in Kashmir. Those troops were supported by Artillery. 12 A war between India and Pakistan was neither in the interest of Mountbatten nor Britain s. Both had big hand in Pakistan s creation and they wanted its stability to keep alive balance of power in the sub-continent. Mountbatten had warned Jinnah of the dangers he faced, during his meeting in Lahore on 1 st November 1947, that war was very harmful for India, but would be completely disastrous for Pakistan and himself. Mountbatten further told that he had no powers to act on his own. Yet he did inform that he had supported Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in two steps that he took, firstly, offer plebiscite in Kashmir, and reference of Kashmir to UNO. Mountbatten had specially flown to Lahore on 1 st November 1947 to make an offer to Jinnah. He was not accompanied by any Indian leader. Jinnah out rightly rejected the offer of Mountbatten and objected strongly to plebiscite. 13 Yet Mountbatten forced Nehru to honour his offer of plebiscite to Jinnah. During the discussion on 1 st November of Governor General Mountbatten with Jinnah of Pakistan, Jinnah described the accession of Kashmir with India as not bonafide one since it rested on fraud and violence and would never be accepted by Pakistan. Mountbatten told him that the accession was perfectly legal and valid. He was further informed by the Governor General that the Maharaja was most anxious to remain independent, but the terror and violence from the tribal raiders for which Pakistan was responsible made him accede to India to obtain help against the invaders. Jinnah repeatedly emphasised that it was India who had committed this violence by sending Indian troops into Srinagar. He even said that the Kashmir Government and the Congress were responsible for the violence and the massacre in Kashmir. Lord Ismay had suggested that main thing was to stop fighting immediately and asked President Jinnah how he had proposed to do so. President replied that both sides should withdraw simultaneously at once. When asked how the tribesmen were to be called off, he said all he had to do was to give them an order to come out and warm them if they did not comply, he would send large forces along their line of communication. It was a matter of great astonishment the amount of control Jinnah had over the raiders. In May 1946, the Cabinet Mission plan virtually granted Jinnah his Pakistan in Groups B and C; Punjab, the NWFP, and Sind in Group B; Bengal and Assam in Group C. To this plan Congress did not agree and thus shuttered the dreams of Jinnah. A frustrated Jinnah called on the Muslims, on 30 th July 1946, to launch Direct Action in his declaration, This day we bid good bye to constitutional methods. Today we have also forged a pistol and we are in a position to use it. This was Jinnah s psycho / thinking and was determined to grab maximum whatever came his way, and this what he did in Kashmir. 14 Mountbatten s forcing Jawaharlal Nehru to refer Kashmir to the United Nations Organisation 8 World Focus July 2017

9 early in January 1948 was far more serious than his offer of plebiscite to Jinnah. It forced India into international politics, making a solution far more complex and difficult. However, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was not in favour of this. He said that we should never have gone to the United Nations Organisation. It has not only prolonged the dispute but, the merits of our case have been completely lost in the interaction of power politics. At that stage, even US and some other powers would have also gone against India. UNO under the influence of Anglo-American axis passed a resolution under Chapter 6 of the UN Charter (which is non-enforceable) and failed to ensure that Pakistan vacates the occupied territories of J&K. Later even Nehru admitted that Kashmir issue had given India a great deal of problem. Jinnah had great objections on plebiscite as feared that the presence of Indian forces and Sheikh Abdullah would influence the elections. Even in the presence of UNO in free and fair atmosphere he would not agree. The main reason was that Pakistan was at an advantage through its raiders. A ceasefire which was kept closely guarded secret was ordered. Even the Army Commanders engaged in Kashmir operations at that time were kept in the dark. That was not so with Pakistan Army Commanders who having been briefed moved up their troops to occupy some of the more strategic heights vacated during extreme cold. Haji Peer was one such commanding peek of great strategic value linking Punch and Pakistan. When the Indian Army was well poised to force the Pak Army to withdraw and liberate the entire state, Nehru once again agreed to a unilateral ceasefire. As per General SPP Thorat s complaint Our forces might have succeeded in evicting the invaders, if Prime Minister had not held them in check and later ordered the ceasefire. Obviously, there must have been a great pressure on Pandit Nehru from the Governor General Mountbatten. Thus, the territory acceded by the Maharaja to the Indian Dominion was divided into two parts. India also lost the control of the strategic Gilgit. On the other side, Pandit Nehru kept questioning the state s accession and referring to plebiscite in Kashmir both at home and abroad, thus sowing a seed of doubt in the mind of common Kashmiri who had fought the Pak aggression voluntarily alongside the Indian Army. Nehru kept his eyes closed to the machinations of Sheikh Abdullah who had mastered the art of stoking Kashmiri sentiments on communal lines and speak in different tone and language in Delhi & Jammu. In his broadcast to the nation over All India Radio on 2nd November 1947, Pandit Nehru said, We are anxious not to finalise anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately to decide, and let me make it clear that it has been our policy that where there is a dispute about the accession of a state to either Dominion, the accession must be made by the people of that state. It is in accordance with this policy that we have added a proviso to the Instrument of Accession of Kashmir. This statement of Nehru was against the spirit and content of Indian Independence Act 1947 which gave absolute power of decision to the ruler and not the people of the state. If Pandit Nehru did not recognise the 1947 Act then why did he and the Congress party agree to the partition of the country? He also conceded to the insistence of Sheikh and his four member team to not to join the Constituent Assembly of India but to negotiate a special status for the status from outside, a move which was strongly objected by Babasaheb Ambedkar, Sardar Patel and host of all other nationalist leaders. This led to inclusion of Article 370 in the Constitution. Nehru was also instrumental in adding Article 35A to the Constitution through a Presidential Ordinance. Pandit Nehru did not support the Praja Parishad movement in Jammu which was launched against the special status of the state. This resulted in widening the rift between the two regions of the state. 15 Instead of keeping both regions together to fight for getting back the Kashmir territory held by Pakistan, a divide has been created in the two regions. Our previous governments have failed in this regard. Turning Point Firstly,in the normal democratic process, Sardar Patel ought to have become India s first Prime Minister bur for Mahatma Gandhi s intervention in proposing Pandit Nehru s exclusive name for President ship of Congress at the working in November This Creation of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Present Scenerio 9

10 was although 12 out of 15 Pradesh Congress committees had supported Sardar Patel. Mahatma Gandhi s intervention tilted the scales in favour of Pandit Nehru. By virtue of that Pandit Nehru became the first Prime Minister. Secondly, in December 1947, Prime Minister took away Kashmir from Sardar Patel s charge and placed it under the charge of Gopalaswami Ayyangar. Such an affront had hurt Patel deeply. Had these two things not happened, today story of POK would have been different. The Pakistan Occupied Kashmir When India gained independence in August 1947, the state of Jammu and Kashmir had an area of 222,236 sq. km. Since then, due to conflict and aggression, Pakistan occupies about 78,114 sq. km and China about 42,685 sq. km, including 5,180 sq. km illegally ceded by Pakistan to China. About 101,437 sq. km remains with India. Thus, three states are now in contention in Kashmir, with China denying strenuously that Aksai Chin, the area that it occupies, was ever a part of Kashmir. The Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) comprises the so-called Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan (earlier named as Northern Areas) and has remained an amorphous entity for six decades now. The Trans Karakoram Tract, comprising Shaksgam from Baltistan and Raskam from Gilgit, which Pakistan ceded to China in 1963, is also a part of POK. China promised to assist Pakistan in building the Karakoram Highway as a payoff. Pakistanoccupied Kashmir (POK) historically belonged to the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Soon after the partition of India in 1947, Maharaja Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir signed the Instrument of Accession, thereby acceding to the Indian Union. Hence, POK is legitimately an inherent part of India. This territory has been under Pakistan s unlawful control ever since the Pakistan Army orchestrated the tribal invasion of the territory in October The so-called Azad Kashmir (AJK) is governed under the Azad Kashmir Interim Constitution Act passed in Even though AJK has a President, Prime minister, and a council, the governing structure is totally powerless and dependent on the Pakistani establishment for the smallest issue at hand. The Karachi Agreement, which governs the rule of Pakistan over Gilgit-Baltistan, was signed between the President of Azad Kashmir, the Muslim Conference and a minister without portfolio from Pakistan. Even though there was no formal merger between AJK and Gilgit-Baltistan (GB), the fate of the latter was decided by Prime Minister AJK and government of Pakistan with no local representative participating in the matter. Over the years Pakistan has tried assiduously to maintain that PoK and GB are two separate entities. There is no mention of GB as a part of Pakistan in the various constitutions of Pakistan, be it the 1956, 1962, 1972 or the 1973 constitution. Even the Sino-Pak Agreement of 1963 states in Article VI that after the settlement of Kashmir by India and Pakistan, the sovereign authority will reopen negotiations with the People s Republic of China... Thus both Pakistan and China admit that presently they do not exercise sovereignty over GB till a final settlement is reached. 16 The Government of Pakistan announced the Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order on 29 August 2009, which reversed the nomenclature of the Northern Areas to the original Gilgit-Baltistan. The order has been widely criticized as it failed to address the basic questions of the rights of the people and the critical issue of provincial autonomy. The order introduced elements that brought Gilgit-Baltistan closer to the structure in AJK in spirit and form but with no impact, as the strings of power were placed with the Government of Pakistan. The order was designed to secure increasing Chinese interest in POK. The development works in POK are heavily dependent on Chinese investments. However, the order was rejected by the political groups in Gilgit-Baltistan, the pro-independence groups, and the pro-indian groups. Though situated near the two fastest growing economies of the world, but remains extremely backward. The General Scenerio in PoK During the recent past, the Taliban have seized power in some parts of Pakistan. The Taliban would attempt to gain strategic depth in this strategically located region. The presence of Afghans in POK would further facilitate the Taliban interests, enabling the militants to amalgamate with the local Afghans and 10 World Focus July 2017

11 carry on dubious activities under a suitable camouflage. The Government of Pakistan would find an outsourced option to contrive cross-border terrorism in India, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir. POK has for long provided safe-haven to home-grown terrorists of Pakistan both those operating in Kashmir Valley and those having close links with al Qaeda and Taliban. The LeT operates freely in the area as Jamaat ud-dawa (JuD). People in POK have faced neglect from the Pakistan government for decades and they look up to these groups for help. JuD played a significant role in the relief and rehabilitation work after the October 2005 earthquake when the state machinery expressed inability in carrying out the same. The increasing number of these training camps could be attributed to foreign mercenaries present in Pakistan. 17 The demography in Gilgit Baltistan in POK has changed so much that the Shia, the original inhabitants of the land, have become a minority. Sunnis from Pakistan were given lucrative job offers and other incentives to settle in POK. President Zia intended to shift the demographic balance of POK in favour of Pakistan, primarily a Sunni state, and the orders to this effect were carried out by General Pervez Musharraf. Similarly, the Northern Light Infantry, which mainly comprised men from POK (it was deployed in the Kargil War) is increasingly manned by non-locals as the local people are no longer trusted. Political Situation Political unrest in POK is based on a range of issues, primarily being the denial of basic rights, constitutional and political. People from PoK have migrated to countries like US, Canada and gulf looking for greener pastures as education and job opportunities are not available and political freedom is non-existent. There is also a sectarian divide because of Sunni ingress in the region. The region has also been linguistically and culturally marginalized. Reports such as the Human Rights Violation in Azad Kashmir and Baroness Emma Nicholson s Kashmir Report for the EU depict a distressing picture of the state of human rights in POK. Pakistan s approach to POK has baffled many as this area is of immense strategic significance. The establishment has brutally crushed political unrest in POK in the past. The War on Terror shoved the Afghan Taliban into Pakistan. The Taliban since then has gained ground in Pakistan and would benefit greatly by gaining a stronghold in POK. The United States is fighting Al Qaeda and Taliban on Pakistani soil in several ways providing military aid, drone attacks, and the like. If these groups spread bases in POK, the US would be compelled to expand its target areas and this could lead to a substantial US military presence in POK. China is intently strengthening its ground in POK, especially in Gilgit-Baltistan with pools of capital. This immense economic presence in the region could probably be followed by some sort of Chinese military presence in the region. If the Taliban gets a stronghold in POK, it would open the gates for proliferation of extremist activities in the regions bordering POK besides Central Asia and India the Chinese province of Xinjiang. China s Influence in PoK The Chinese interest in POK dates back to the construction of Karakoram Highway, the highest road in the world, built at a height of 4665 metres (15,397 feet). The highway has yielded tremendous trading opportunities for both countries. It has also been used extensively to transfer arms and ammunition from China to Pakistan, and fissile nuclear and missile material from China. China has made substantial investments in POK especially after the earthquake of Early in 2009, it proffered $300 million for development projects in Muzaffarabad, Rawalkot and Bagh. Pakistan and China have also signed several agreements for building dams in POK, the latest being the MoU for building a dam in Bunji in Astore district. India, which views such agreements between China and Pakistan as adverse to India China relations, has sharply criticized this move. While OBOR is aimed at linking China to Eurasia and fostering economic cooperation between countries, CPEC has one aim: Strengthening the relationship between China and Pakistan to almost Creation of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Present Scenerio 11

12 symbiotic proportions through a $50 billion investment to expand and upgrade Pakistan s infrastructure. India has been wary of CPEC from the outset, even going as far as to boycott the high-profile Belt and Road Forum in Beijing. And with good reason. At the heart of CPEC are a series of roads, power plants and development projects connecting China s restive Xinjiang province to Gwadar in South-Western Pakistan. The trouble is: CPEC passes straight through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Little wonder then that, according to a report in Al Jazeera after the announcement of CPEC by Xi in June 2015, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told China that this plan was unacceptable. Suchitra Vijayan, a New York-based lawyer told Al Jazeera that India has taken this position because it wants to keep Kashmir as a bilateral issue. However, with the introduction of China and CPEC, Kashmir could become an international issue, which plays into Pakistan s strengths. According to a report in The Tribune, Beijing has positioned its armed forces in Gilgit and Baltistan to protect the workers who are constructing CPEC. As per reports, more concerning is that China wants to have its Military base in Pakistan. The report released by the UN s Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) said that the project could also fuel separatist movement in Pakistan s Balochistan province. The dispute over Kashmir is also of concern, since the crossing of the CPEC in the region might create geo-political tension with India and ignite further political instability, said the report on China s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). India s arguments with China on the BRI have had one important effect. It has helped bring the triangular dynamic between India, Pakistan and China in Jammu and Kashmir into sharp focus. Although the popular discourse in India sees Kashmir as a bilateral issue with Pakistan, China has always made it a three-body problem. Unlike the Anglo- Americans who fancied mediation between India and Pakistan in the past, and the Hurriyat separatists who now pretend to be the third party, it is China that is the real third force in Kashmir. 18 China s presence in Pak-occupied Kashmir has been steadily growing. As the CPEC deepens the integration between Pakistan occupied Kashmir and China, Beijing looms larger than ever before over J&K. Nevertheless, the effort by the two countries to address the tricky issue of territorial sovereignty in Kashmir are welcome and must continue. While it may be prepared to talk, Beijing is unlikely to suspend work on its economic and strategic projects in Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Even as it engages in a necessary and patient dialogue with China, Delhi needs to take a number of steps of its own: (a) Delhi must step up the effort to modernise and deepen J&K s connectivity with the rest of India. (b) Delhi must test the sincerity of the Pakistani and Chinese statements that CPEC is open for Indian participation. Delhi has not been averse to crossborder infrastructure cooperation in Kashmir and it has made specific proposals to both Pakistan and China in the past. (c) Third, the Sino-Indian argument on CPEC in Kashmir is deeply connected to the question of Arunachal Pradesh. While China asks India to downplay the sovereignty argument in Pakistan occupied Kashmir, Beijing objects to all Indian activity, political or economic, in Arunachal Pradesh. The state is part of the Indian Union, but is claimed in entirety by China. In Arunachal, Delhi needs to raise its game on accelerating the state s economic development and its connectivity to the rest of India. China has looked to assuage India s fears and signalled that they would stay neutral on Kashmir. According to a report in the Indian Express, Xi, at the opening of China s Belt and Road Forum, said: All countries should respect each other s sovereignty, dignity and territorial integrity, each other s development paths and social systems, and each other s core interests and major concerns. While Xi did not mention India or CPEC, the implication was clear. However, political analysts worry is if China, given the high stakes involved in CPEC, will China be able to stay neutral if the Kashmir issue heats up. Pakistan supports Chinese involvement in POK for upgradation of infrastructure and development in the region. It seeks to capitalize on Chinese presence in POK to counterbalance India in a warlike situation with India. Conclusion India has allowed its strong hold in Kashmir to slip and has not played its cards well. Opportunities came India s way but our Leaders let them slip. I leave to 12 World Focus July 2017

13 the readers to decide whether the creation of POK could have been avoided. Was POK created due to the circumstances as they happened, or a British creation or was it due to wrong approach by some of our Leaders of that time. Present scenario suggests that, POK is likely to become the geo-strategic chessboard between India, China and Pakistan. India s military option is absolutely ruled out now as India may not like to create a militarise zone in this area. India cannot look back towards US now as the strategic logic that largely drove George W. Bush and Barack Obama s overtures to India, that India s rise is in America s larger interest, can no longer be the basis of India-US engagement under Trump. There remains a lot of confusion about the future trajectory of India-US relations under Trump. It is Trump s China policy which will have the most significant long-term impact on India and regional geopolitics. There is growing concern that as Trump turns America inwards, he is ceding the strategic space to China. Even Russia may not get involved against China s interests. Recent exchange of diplomatic statements amongst the three states strongly indicates such a possibility, where each is vying to promote its own political, economic and strategic pursuit. There are new opportunities, if only Indian policy mandarins remain open to new possibilities. Endnotes 1 Pyarelal, Mahatma Gandhi The Last Phase 2 Alan Campbell Johnson, Mission with Mount Batten 3 A K Mazumdar, Advent of Indian Independence 4 R J Moore, Escape from Empire: The Attlee Government and the Indian Problem 5 Sardar Vallabhai Patel, Balraj Krishan 6 Molana Azad, India Wins Freedom 7 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 8 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 9 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 10 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 11 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 12 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 13 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 14 Balraj Krishan, Sardar Vallabhai Patel 15 Brig. Anil Gupta, Kashmir Cauldron: Who stoked the fire 16 Ranjit Singh Kalha, CPEC: the need for a second look by India 17 Dr Priyanka Singh, Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir: The Future Trajectory 18 C Raja Mohan, Article, The politics of territory Forthcoming issues of World Focus: 2017 with Deadlines for Submission of Articles (Words: 5,000) Kindly send your Articles much before the assigned Deadlines. August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 December 2017 Turmoil in Europe & India-EU Ties (10th July) Pakistan, Afghanistan & Balochistan (10th August) Oil Politics & Central Asia (10th September) India s Foreign Policy: Series 1 (10th October) India s Foreign Policy: Series - 2 (10th November) Creation of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Present Scenerio 13

14 Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: Perspectives Prof. Snehalata Panda Repetitions of history are as relevant as the theory that each occurrence is unique by itself for linking the present with the past. Jammu and Kashmir s history lies in between the two. Cascading out of it is the dispute over PoK accelerated by strategic, political and economic factors. Introduction: Pakistani occupied Jammu and Kashmir (1) (PoK) with a territory of about 13,297 square kilometers and an estimated population of about four million has dominated public discourse in India since China s announcement to invest in the China- Pak Economic Corridor (CPEC), the gateway to its Belt and Road Initiative. Core issue is sovereignty of the land that is disputed for the last seven decades between the two countries. Notwithstanding the claim of India, Pakistan ceded to China the Shaksgam tract along the north eastern border of Gilgit, -Baltistan which is now a part of China s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. It has assumed a central place in the political circles of both the countries so much so that no political party dares to budge from the past commitments. In 2014 Modi government had initiated the process for peace between India and Pakistan but soon it morphed in to a dispute of unusual proportions with intensified military action as the Pakistani interest groups are averse to make peace with India without resolving the Kashmir Issue. (2) The unsettled issue has expedited heavy military spending, surveillance across the Line of Control (LoC) with grievous consequences for the people as well as border patrol personnel. Increasing violence across the LoC which India refers as the international border and Pakistan as working boundary, specifically after the surgical strikes of 29 September 2016, has embittered relation between India and Pakistan, alienated the people of Kashmir, encouraged China to push forward the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) and initiate measure to defy India s claim on Arunachal Pradesh. External factors like Pakistani supported extremists, China s interest, influence of radical Islamic groups 14 World Focus July 2017 and social media portals contributed to the spike in violent crimes with unusual speed and intensity across the border. Adverse opinion in India veers round the debate on referring the matter to UN for a settlement by the Nehru government in India which has provided scope for Pakistan to ask for mediation of countries extraneous to the issue to settle the dispute. US ambassador to the UN s offer to mediate on the issue is no different from the earlier attempts made by Pakistan for external intervention to decide the Kashmir dispute. Trump government s stress on America First indicates its disinterest in the Indo- Pak dispute but it may not discount the expanding influence of China and Russia in the region. China has been progressing well in globalizing its Belt Road Initiative (BRI). Even though India has sustained its stand on sovereignty of the disputed region; its diplomatic space is limited by the ambition of great powers though at the moment Sino-Pak diplomatic design has not been successful in achieving its objectives. Historical Perspective: India s claim on PoK is based on events leading to Kashmir s amalgamation with India. Aspirations for independence have been supported by a good number of people because of the perception that Kashmir was never a part of India and it was not under British rule during colonization. Its king was averse to the Indian leaders fighting for independence from colonial rule. (3) This is exacerbated by the faulty approaches to national integration, demographic divisions and high-handed policies of the government besides the contention between India and Pakistan centering Jammu and Kashmir. Repetitions of history are as relevant as the theory that each occurrence is unique by itself for linking the present with the past. Jammu and Kashmir s history lies in between the two. Archeological discoveries testify that it was a part of

15 Indus Valley Civilization, original home for the Aryans and witnessed struggle between the Dravidians and Aryans based in Sindh. It was a part of Ashokan and Kanishkan empire. As is evident from the existing monuments at Avantipura in the South of Srinagar, it was ruled by Avantiburman from AD. Islam had its foot prints in Kashmir in the 14 th century AD. Zain-Ul Abidin ruled it from In 1586 it was conquered by the Mughals. Afghans ruled it when the Mughal empire was losing its hold followed by the Sikh rule. When the Sikhs were defeated by the British in 1846 the state came under General Gulab Singh who was rewarded for his help in defeating the Sikhs and his successors ruled it till 1947.Its past is chronicled by Kalhana in Rajtarangani, Chinese traveler Hsuan-tsang and Arab scholar Al Beruni. According to some scholars Kashmir was no different from other princely states which had entered into treaty with the British government of India but enjoyed considerable independence in ruling over their respective territories. With the lapse of British paramountcy, they were given the option to join either India or Pakistan. (4) Though the rulers were legally free to join either India or Pakistan into which India was divided, the major determinants were religion and geography. The issue of Kashmir s accession to India is settled in 1947 but the process was different. Pakistan claimed it on the basis of religion and signed the Standstill Agreement where as India maintained a secularist stand. While the ruler was undecided violence broke out in Jammu, Poonch and Gilgit. Pakistan blocked the passage of essential commodities to Jammu and Kashmir through its territory. In September 1947, the tribals invaded the valley with Pakistani support. Upon the request of the ruler India provided military assistance which was conditional on signing of the Instrument of Accession but the final political status was to be decided through plebiscite. The ruler of Kashmir agreed to accede to the Dominion of India on 26 October 1947 after failing to subdue the invasion of his territory by the Pathan tribesman. Lord Mountbatten then Governor General of India made the remark that it is my government s wish that as soon as law and order have been restored in Jammu and Kashmir and her soil cleared of the invader the question of the state s accession should be settled by a reference to the people. (5) The dispute between India and Pakistan has continued since then on the issue of plebiscite. The accession day is celebrated on the Indian side of J&K while the separatists consider it as a black day. Even the day of accession is disputed. (6) Plebiscite could not take off as it is mired in several unresolved issues between both the countries. As per the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution s/654 the UN Commission on India and Pakistan (UNCIP) was constituted. In April 1948, it adopted the first plebiscite resolution which called for withdrawal of Pakistani troops from the territory of Jammu & Kashmir and reduction in the number of Indian armed forces. UN made several attempts to implement plebiscite till 1958 but could not succeed due to their intransigence on this issue. Both the countries have established political control on the territories under their control that is Government of Jammu and Kashmir in Indian federation and Government of Azad Kashmir in Pakistan. The Kashmiris have not reconciled to this phenomenon but are divided on the issue of independence and merger. In 1957, north-western Kashmir was fully integrated into Pakistan becoming Azad Kashmir (Pakistan Administered Kashmir). In 1962 China occupied Aksai Chin, the north-eastern region bordering Ladakh. Later India captured more than 80 percent of the Siachin glacier. Pakistan reiterates Kashmiri s right to self-determination by the plebiscite but India argues that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India after the signing of the Instrument of Accession by the King. The dispute resulted in wars between the two countries in 1947and 1965 and a limited conflict in The state is divided by the Line of Control, the ceasefire line agreed upon in 1947 and modified as per the Simla Agreement of Linguistic affinity of the region with Kashmir is debated as Kashmiri is not the language of all the people of PoK. It is Hindco an offshoot of Pahari, followed by Gojri and other dialects. It has more similarities with Jammu rather than Kashmir but the people are more emotional by relating to Kashmir and claim it as their own as is evident from their literature replete with approbation of Kashmir valley, sacrifices of people for Azadi in the wake of gross human rights violations by Indian forces. People have a negative perception about India. (7) They are divided on the issue of its future, some are for complete independence of Kashmir. But compared to them more people are in favour of joining with Pakistan.(8) Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: Perspectives 15

16 Strategic Perspective: POK comprises the so-called Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. Azad Kashmir(AJK) is governed by Azad Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, It has a governing structure but under the control of Pakistani government. It is governed as per the Karachi Agreement signed between the president of Azad Kashmir, the Muslim Conference and a minister of Pakistan. In 2009 Pakistan announced the Gilgit Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order which reversed the name of Northern Areas to Gilgit- Baltistan. Politically it became similar to AJK but controlled by Pakistan. It is criticised as more in tune to please China as it has heavily invested in this region. The CPEC linking to Gwadar port in Pakistan and China is passing through this disputed territory. With a conglomerate of pro independent groups and pro India groups it is the most disturbed territory. A committee headed by the Advisor of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan has proposed to give it the status of fifth province. This is a serious challenge to India s resolution that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India including PoK. Besides using the territory for proxy war with India, it has immense strategic and economic value for Pakistan. Its geographic location is used by Pakistan to further its strategic objectives. It shares its borders with Punjab and North West Provinces in Pakistan in the west, the Wakhan Corridor of Afghanistan in the north-west,xinjiang province of China in the north and Jammu and Kashmir of India to the east. The irony is, it is the most backward even though it shares its borders with the two fast developing economies in the region. The reason is obvious as it is used by the extremist groups to carry on their activities in Jammu and Kashmir. Home grown terrorists of Pakistan are trained in the camps located in this region. Successive governments in Pakistan have been successful in changing its demography by encouraging the Sunni Muslims to settle in the POK. Consequently, the Shias are reduced to a minority. (9) Repressive policies against the Shias resulted in frequent disturbances and weak governance has exacerbated demographic, social and economic problems. Presence of terrorists has made it a theater of war and diplomatic machinations. Interest of US and China has added to its security problem. As per the Sino-Pakistan boundary agreement of 1963, Pakistan ceded 5,180 sq km of territory to China in Aksai chin in order to facilitate China to build the Karakorum Highway providing over land link between Beijing and Karachi. This highway passes through Kashmir territory and has been constructed illegally without the permission of India. It includes a portion of Hunza territory of the erstwhile Gilgit Agency of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The two countries signed MoU in 2006 to widen the highway. China has invested in infrastructure projects in the POK since 2005 when it was badly affected by an earthquake. CPEC will further facilitate trade and commerce allowing China to access the Central Asian market through the disputed territory. Pakistan has succeeded in accelerating Chinese involvement in the region for development of infrastructure as well as counterbalancing India. At the moment China has indicated its non-involvement in settling the Kashmir issue but interested in POK to advance its influence and commercial activities across South and Central Asia. Pakistan would continue to keep India in pressure by escalating disturbances in Kashmir valley. US has supported Afghanistan s view to open the Wakhan Corridor while China does not agree for possible escalation of terrorist activities in its disturbed Xinxiang province where the Uighur secessionist movement is strong due to the jehadi groups reportedly trained in Pakistani Madrassas. (10) The militant camps despite being destroyed in the 2005 earth quake have surfaced within no time. The trained militants are a threat to the neighbouring countries as well as for escalation of global terrorism. But lack of consensus between the great powers to rise above their narrow self-interest has helped but little in restraining their expansive destructive activities. Nuclear Perspective: Scare of nuclear war looms large in the subcontinent after Pakistan tested its nuclear device and acquired technological improvisation capability with no clear announcement on its options to use. India has the nuclear capability with a No First Use (NFU) policy and is an instrument of balance (11) Vijay Shankar argues that negotiated agreements assuage friction between nations during Times of trouble. The credibility of India s deterrence is sought through periodic technological intrusions. The doctrine has remained unchanged since (12). According to 16 World Focus July 2017

17 him China adheres to NFU as well as maintenance of credible minimum deterrence which has been sustained since 1964.But reportedly China has been assisting Pakistan and North Korea which has given it an antagonistic tripolar character to nuclear proliferation. The Chinese policy of N F U should be applicable to Pakistan s nuclear arsenal but military control over the civilian government has made its nuclear programme less credible. Its recent announcement to use nuclear power if threatened indicates that it will not hesitate to use nuclear weapons against India. Threat being not defined the subcontinent is most vulnerable for nuclear war as unrest in Kashmir and horrific incidents across the LoC are accelerating. Pakistan has no declared doctrine; its collaborative nuclear programme with China drives nuclear policy. It espouses an opaque deterrent under military control steered by precepts obscure in form, seeped in ambiguity and guided by a military strategy that not only finds unity with nonstate actors, but also perceives conventional and nuclear weapons as one continuum. The introduction of tactical nuclear weapons exacerbates matters. It has periodically professed four thresholds which if transgressed triggers a nuclear response; these are geographic, economic, military and political. It does not take a great deal of intellectual exertion to declare whose case lowering of the nuclear threshold promotes. (13) However,India s NFU is criticised as its official statements since 1999 and induction of first strike weapons to its nuclear arsenal has diluted its nuclear policy. While the 1999 draft doctrine clearly stated India s commitment to NFU,2003 doctrine indicated a qualitative NFU that is India has the right to respond to chemical and biological attacks. In 2010, it was further clarified that NFU applies to countries not possessing nuclear weapons. Lack of clarity in its actions and announcements is one of the reasons for its failure to enlist support of the nuclear suppliers group even after its membership of the Missile Technology Control Regime. (14) China along with other members of NSG has objected India s membership insisting that clear guidelines should be formulated for NSG membership. Nuclear proliferation has sustained deterrence for the presumption that such a war is not winnable. But if nations reverse the presumption by focusing on winnability, destruction of the enemy without destroying the attackers territory then the consequences will be disastrous. After 72 years since the last use of nuclear weapons, neither has proliferation occurred en masse nor have nuclear weapons found tactical favour. The world s nuclear realpolitik ontogeny now suggests that the first step towards the negation of nuclear weapons is to find value in a universal declaration of no first use. (15) This is more important than ever in view of the tension on PoK issue. China-Pak Economic Corridor: CPEC spanning 3000 kms has diluted India s claim of sovereignty on the territory. China has fast forwarded its Belt Road Initiative by investing in CPEC. The Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation meeting reiterated its stand. It will be conduit for China to access to territories spanning three continents to promote economic, political and strategic objectives as well as play greater role in conflict resolution. (16) It is passing through a disputed territory administered by a nation that is politically unstable and economically weak. The project besides undermining India s interests is aimed at creation of China centric world. BRF will be a platform to achieve its objective specifically in view of inward looking US policy. India s stand on CPEC is sustained ever since the project was announced to be built on the disputed territory without discussion with India. The issue of sovereignty of the territory cannot be compromised howsoever genuine China s intentions might be in its behemoth BRI. (17) Chinese scholars have raised apprehensions on India s stand as it is a member of Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and Bangladesh, China, India, Myanmar (BCIM) Economic Corridor of which BRI is a part. They underscore India s dislike for China s growing clout in the region and China dominated global order. Indo -Japanese cooperation on the Freedom Corridor as an alternative to China s BRI reinforces this argument. Moreover, India s relation with China has been backsliding for its objection to India s membership of NSG and Massod Azhar issue. Dalai Lama s visit to Tawang and China s recent announcements relating to Arunachal Pradesh are serious bumps in the road to bilateral relationship. (18) Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: Perspectives 17

18 The motto behind the project is to have an outlet for its manufactured goods, alternative trade routes outside Malacca Strait and South China Sea. But Mao Siwei dismisses Malacca Dilemma and argues that if it can be blocked so will be Gwadar and the security of the route cannot be guaranteed in future as it passes through the disturbed area. Chinese ships have used the sea lanes of Indian Ocean without any security problem so far. In order to ensure security China has to maintain military presence as well as friendly relation with India. (19) It will be a boon for Pakistan in strategic and economic terms. Its energy needs will be fulfilled with Chinese assistance besides connecting Baluchistan, Khaibar-Pakhtunkhwa and federally administered tribal areas, quite unrest as well as balance against India. China has proposed to build two power projects, 7100 MW Bunji Dam and 4500MW Bhasha Dam in Gilgit which are parts of CPEC. Pakistan has sought fresh international arbitral tribunal proceedings against India over two comparatively small projects in its part of Jammu and Kashmir shows its incongruous approach to its two powerful nations. The dams besides being huge will accelerate China s strategic presence but escalate resistance by the locals in view of the environmental hazards, demographic displacement and jeopardize the future of Indus Water Treaty leading to further tension between India, Pakistan and China. Its economic viability too, is doubtful. China will invest about $50 billion out of which 75 percent is loan and 25 percent equity. Pakistan will have to service debt to the tune of 4 billion annually. But without 7 percent year on year growth it will be impossible for Pakistan to service Chinese debt. It will plunge Pakistan into a debt trap coming out of which will be difficult for its sagging economic performance with no promise of growing fast anytime soon. It envisages investments in special economic Zones but in view of disturbances in Baluchistan the project will be less attractive for investment. Opposition is mounting for discriminatory federal governance. Even so it serves its India baiting diplomacy and opens an avenue to control the disputed territory reinforced with the support of China. China on the other hand will hasten its linkage to Central Asia where it has invested in several sectors. That China has no altruistic intentions in investing on CPEC can be inferred from the Hembantota port project built in Sri Lanka with Chinese loan. The issue of loss of Sri Lankan sovereignty over the land is still perturbing. Similarly, loans given by China to some African countries have become controversial for nonutilization of local labour, use of Chinese material and machinery and nil generation of wealth. The Kyauk Pyu project in Myanmar too, is encountering problem.myitsone project was stopped because of resistance by the Burman majority who are against dam construction on the Irrawadi River. But Central Asian Countries are benefitting from Chinese built infrastructure and have provided land for Chinese industries. Central Asian steppe is leased to China for farming benefitting China s domestic needs and agri commerce. It has gained geopolitical clout besides improvement in employment and market access. Withdrawal of US from its leadership role in Asia will provide China an opportunity to expand its influence further. Most interesting is Pakistan has invited India to join the CPEC. (20) China has welcomed its decision as a goodwill gesture but prefers to include India on the basis of consensus perhaps because China was not consulted by Pakistan about the decision. Liu Zongyi writes about the condition for India that is Pakistanis themselves do not want India to be part of the CPEC or they believe if India hopes to join it must improve bilateral ties first CPEC runs through Pakistan controlled Kashmir which is also claimed by India as its territory.it is almost suicidal for Indian politicians to make concessions over the issue The fundamental reason why India is against the project is that China could get access to the gate of Indian Ocean through the corridor and Pakistan s strength will be enhanced...cpec is a multilateral project..aiming at regional economic integration. And so it is inclusive...india, Afghanistan Iran and Central Asian countries can participate and become stake holders. International concern about the belt road initiative is for its geopolitical implications. China will oppose labelling Pakistan as supporting terrorism. (21) The inclusion of a third party is a well calculated diplomacy as work on CPEC has encountered difficulties due to which it may be 18 World Focus July 2017

19 delayed and might become a burden on China. Security is a major problem even though Pakistan has provided but the joint report recommends for seeking help from Chinese sources. (22) Opinion in India is divided about India s absence in the BRIF. The claim of sovereignty is debated for the Karakoram highway is built on disputed territory. Its economic advantages are stressed through commerce in the branch corridors of CPEC. But India s support to China in 1950s did not ensure peace neither has its commercial relation since 1990s has ensured support for its membership of UN Security Council, NSG and other international issues. Rather lack of trust and competition with adverse trade relation characterise relationship between both the countries. Concluding Observations: POK has disabled India to link directly with Central Asia and Afghanistan. Passages in Kashmir are available but they have weak infrastructure and risky for communication. India s sovereignty on this territory will enable it to share the border with Khaiber-Pakhtunkhwa of Pakistan on one side and the Wakhan Corridor with Afghanistan opening up access to Central Asian markets. Moreover, Chinese control will end once for all and peace will prevail in Jammu and Kashmir. But this seems to be a remote possibility under the present diplomatic design of India s neighbours and interest of great powers. Annexation of the territory by use of military is another possibility but the consequences may be suicidal under the present circumstances. Pakistan has been tightening its control over Gilgit-Baltistan, the latest being elevating it to the status of its fifth province thereby overriding the claim of India that it is a disputed territory. In the aftermath of earthquake in this region Chinese presence with escalated investment in development projects including infrastructure indicates that India s diplomatic initiatives have failed to put on hold Pakistan s endeavour to tighten its control. Pakistan s diplomatic isolation is not successful either as big powers perceive it as a hedge to fight extremists.poor economies of South Asia bank upon Chinese development funds.despite India s endeavour to keep it a step ahead of Pakistan as its development map and economy are no match for Pakistan,international opinion favours equating both sometimes even putting Pakistan above India perceivably to demoralise India.This is more so after Pakistan s acquisition of nuclear power and announcement to use it if threatened. After the Simla Agreement signed in 1972 successive Pakistani governments have attempted to amalgamate these areas into Pakistan but the Azad Kashmir government (POK) has insisted that Gilgit and Baltistan were a part of Jammu and Kashmir. Recent Indo-Pak tension across LoC has increasingly favoured domestic opinion to follow extreme measures like abrogation of MFN status to Pakistan, closure of embassy and even bombing across the border. The Krishna Ghati incident (23) has reiterated it further. This is sound in view of the failure of the peace initiatives made by India in A conducive environment for political solution to the problem between the two countries was evident when Pakistan s political balance shifted in favour of Nawaz Sharif in The Agra initiative indicated diffusion of crisis between the two countries which was repeated again in 2013 and reinforced with Indian prime minister s neighbourhood first policy. But soon the environment became hostile. India and Pakistan have made efforts to resolve the dispute through dialogue, a frame work for a settlement over Kashmir was attempted by which Pakistan was to give up its claim over the territory and India would agree to a soft border but the deal was scuttled in 2008 when LeT led attack in Mumbai killing 170 people. Soon the political process was resumed but without any tangible outcome. The problem could not be solved because of internal pressure in both the countries. The pressure in India is non military but in Pakistan the generals are averse to any kind of agreement. Pakistan has accelerated its nuclear tests after India was allowed access to civil nuclear technology. Now that both are nuclear powers it is hoped that war will be detrimental for the aggressor. But Pakistan s recent announcements contradict nuclear capability as deterrence.it could hardly tame the terror groups neither will it give up its claim on Indian held Kashmir.But the present developments indicate that it might cross the threshold Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: Perspectives 19

20 .With the changing perception of Pakistani elites use of nuclear power is possible if it is threatened. Dispute over POK has caused immense loss of life in both the countries. It has made the Pakistani military more powerful. Both have diverted huge amount of funds for military modernization and acquisition of nuclear power. Pakistan supports the Taliban to undermine India s allies in the northern Afghanistan. The LeT is still surviving though banned in 2001 and continues to get support from Pakistani military. By itself, a settlement with India will not make Pakistan a safe place. But it would encourage a series of changes reining in the generals, building up democratic institutions, spending more on health and education, rejecting Islamist terrorism, rethinking its approach to Afghanistan which could start to transform the country. Until that happens, Pakistan will remain a disappointment to itself and a danger to the world (24) Present stand of India is different from its earlier initiative when it held top level discussions despite such occurrences. Now it perceives that diplomatic isolation of Pakistan will lessen cross border attacks, pare down militancy and restore peace in Jammu and Kashmir. But Pakistan besides being closer to China and Russia has conducted naval exercises and reached out to the Central Asian nations. Defiance of ICJ decision on the Kulbhushan Jadav case are but indications that it has alternative options to defy India. Pakistan probably is repairing the damage to the losses it has incurred in the diplomatic front by continuing the conflict as the military has a strong hold on the political domain. This is evident from the Nagrota attack. Big power support to Pakistan is not ruled out as Russia is selling it arms and needs it for its fight against terrorism. Pakistan is closer to US since With periodic intransigence, the relationship was over all satisfactory between the two countries. It receives huge amount of US assistance following the US war on terror. Even the Trump administration has continued assistance to Pakistan though a proposal has been incorporated in the annual budget of the president to convert its aid into debt, the final call of which will be taken by the US Department of Foreign Affairs. It is a reflection of Trump administration s 20 World Focus July 2017 emphasis on transactional relationship. Recently Trump has referred India as one of the victims of terrorism. (24). The annual budget has also indicated New Silk Road project mooted earlier by former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton that will be a joint investment project aimed at economic growth and stability in Central Asia. (26) It will be a challenge to China s BRI specifically in Central Asia. India has more resources now to counter Pakistani pressure but the time is not suitable in view of volatile international relations the shape of which is unpredictable at the moment. But a permanent solution to the problem will take the edge off incessant hostility saving people and property. Such a solution is impossible anytime soon. Therefore, India should keep its diplomatic channels open and enhance its capabilities to counter challenges from a strong locus. References: 1.Renamed by Modi government also called as Azad Kashmir in Pakistan, Pakistani controlled(administered) Kashmirby UN. POK was in the news when US made a massive hunt for the Al Queda leader Osama bin Laden who was reportedly in Muzaffarabad, the capital of AJK. The region is haven for militant training camps. The terrorists involved in Mumbai in November 2008 travelled from Bait-ul Mujahaideen,the operational headquarters of Lashkar-e-Toyyaba(LeT). in Muzaffarabad,via Karachi to Mumbai.The chief of LeT Zaki-ur Rehman was arrested in Muzaffarabad the capital of AJK. 2.except the 1971 Indo-Pak war. 3. This is evident from the Kohala Bridge incident of 1946.When Nehru was refused entry into the territory of Jammu &Kashmir.He along with his followers were arrested when they entered the state, Athale,Kashmir;Historical Background,India defence review,net edition,21,august, The Hindustan Times, October 14, Prem Shankar Jha is of the opinion that it was signed on 25 October 1947 while British researcher Andrew Whitehead noted that it was signed on 27 October India is perceived as repressive Except Baltistan and Gupis,all the divisions of PoK are Sunni.Ismailies are in majority in Gupis and Shias in majority in Baltistan Vijay Shankar, The value of a Declared No First Use Policy, The Strategist,1 May, ibid 13.ibid ibid. 16.China ready to play a greater role in resolving conflicts in South and South East Asia,Global Times, May 1, BRI is based on three principles which are Gong Shang(negotiate/talk),Gong Jian(construct/ Build,Gong Xiang(share good results) and five connections namely-political, infrastructure, capital, trade and people-to people In his blog, titled Three Misgivings on the China Pakistan Economic Corridor, published on 10 December, According to Pakistani media, Amir Riaz, the Pakistan Army s Southern Command chief, invited India to join the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and share the fruits of future development by shelving anti-pakistan activities and subversion. 21. Liu Zongyi Pakistan s CPEC proposal to India sends an important gesture, opinion@globaltimes.com.cn,see( 2017/january-2017/2226-pakistans-cpec-invitation-to-india-sends-important-gesture 22.Joint Research Report on CPEC, the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies of People s (Renmin) University of China and Caijing Magazine,20 December beheading and mutilating of captured military personnel n s p e a k a b l e - h o r r o r - u s - p r e s i d e n t - t r u m p - i n - s a u d i - a r a b i a / s t o r y - t8wnmspd6j3ra0jyhssk9o.html 26.India key player in US 2 infra projects in Asia; move to counter China s OBOR.

21 Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) & India Dr. SudhanshuTripathi As the 1994 Indian parliamentary resolution reiterated the legal position that the entire territory of the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and asked Pakistan to vacate the area under its illegal occupation, it is, therefore, difficult to comprehend why India has taken so long to assert its legitimate claim over PoK in an effective and forceful manner. Indeed, India s lackadaisical attitude on this issue is responsible, to a large extent, for the present chaotic situation in the Kashmir Valley. It has also provided Pakistan an opportunity to consolidate its hold over PoK - divided administratively into so-called Azad Jammu Kashmir and the Northern Areas of Gilgit- Baltistan. Hence as a solution, the Indian government should consider the complex issue in a holistic manner by learning from the past mistakes and must take innovative and bold measures to solve this vexed issue. Prime Minister Modi s initiative on PoK is an important first step in that direction and that may indeed create good prospects for more such actions to follow in future. Introduction Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) or Azad Jammu and Kashmir abbreviated as AJK and commonly known as Azad Kashmir, is a self-governing administrative unit of Pakistan which is undergoing the worst kind of turbulence for the past many decades and has now taken the shape of a major civil war. Closely related with it is the current spell of political turmoil in an adjoining region known as Gilgit Baltistan - a part of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) - as regards its conversion into Pakistan s fifth province and that has gained deep traction due to China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) programme launched by China. While grim situations have had occurred earlier too in the Kashmir valley but the ongoing chaos being witnessed here are as serious as the one that actually happened after the arrest of Sheikh Abdullah in 1953, which have already taken the toll of around 9000 injured and 100 dead. As is well known that this unrest was precipitated by the killing of Burhan Wani, the commander of Hurriyat, as he was very popular among misguided and distraught youths of the valley because of his close connect with anti-national and anti-social youths of the border state for his regular social media postings. Though the restlessness among the misguided youths of the state is not a new phenomenon as most of them appear used to the environment of anarchy and disorder or gun culture and even macabre violence and terror and consequently therefore they very often take recourse to lawlessness and anarchy like stone pelting or attacking police and security forces and military in their unethical and immoral bid of protecting terrorists and anti-national elements from them. As a matter of fact, PoK or Azad Kashmir is a part of the greater Kashmir region which unfortunately continues to remain a highly contentious issue between India and Pakistan because being based on Pakistan s territorial claim over PoK. The territory of PoK is situated to the west of India s state of Jammu and Kashmir which was earlier a part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. But that ceased to exist as a result of the 1947 India - Pakistan war on Kashmir. Again the territory shares a border with Gilgit Baltistan, together with which it is referred to by the United Nations and other international organisations as Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The territory also borders with Punjab province of Pakistan in the south and Khyber Pakhtunkwhala province in the west. And Azad Kashmir, in the east, is separated from the Indianadministered state of Jammu and Kashmir by the Line of control - the de-facto border between India and Pakistan. It has a total area of 13,297 square kms (5,134 sq miles), with an estimated population of around 5 million people. The economy of the PoK rests mostly on agriculture, services, tourism, and remittances sent by members of the Mirpuri British Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) & India 21

22 community. Nearly, 87% people of this region are engaged in farming as they own their farms. The region has a literacy rate of approximately 72% and has the highest enrolment in Pakistani schools. This paper is about long persisting lawlessness and ongoing civil war like situation in the Pakistan occupied Kashmir which continues to exert grave repercussions in the Kashmir Valley as well as the entire country thereby adversely affecting India s sovereign control over the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir in the eyes of militants-terrorists and separatists operating in the border state provided with the logistical help extended by Pakistan supported cross-border terrorism along with other regional and global terror groups having shelter in Pakistani territory since the long past. The second part discusses about Pakisan s dilemma as regards incorporating the region as a fullfledged province into its territory followed by India s concerns of ever mounting militancy and terrorism in the valley and the third part deals Chinese machinations in the region and the subsequent part discusses about the available possible options with India which the country can proceed ahead. Lastly the paper concludes in favour dynamic diplomacy by India for pressurising Pakistan and China with a view to restrain them into interfering in Gilgit Baltistan and fomenting regular troubles and such grave threats in the PoK along with initiating bold steps for stamping out militancy and terrorism immediately along with facilitating for speedy socio-economic and political reforms and reviving the cultural distinctions of kashmiriat in the state. Considering the sensitive geopolitical nature of Gilgit Baltistan with respect to its own security and stability, India is bitterly contesting Pakistan s gamble of granting provincial status to this region, thereby leading to mounting bitterness to the frosty India-Pakistan relations. Geographically, Gilgit Baltistan consists of the larger chunk of PoK which has been under Pakistan s illegal control since The region remained politically deprived for decades and disenfranchised until 2009, when quasi-political reforms in the form of an Empowerment and Selfrule Order was enacted essentially to contain the simmering discontent among masses which, however, provisionally created a semblance of enfranchisement but without conceding Gilgit Baltistan their political right to represent in the National Assembly and Senate of Pakistan. In fact, the region is a crucial land link connecting CPEC from Kashgar to Gwadar and is of unequivocal salience to the project. Hence, while CPEC mission is gradually unfolding in select sectors, an important part of the existing debate on the legal status of Gilgit Baltistan as a province is of particular concern for India where speculations are rife about Beijing s covert agenda for helping out Pakistan to deliberately change the politico-legal status of the region so as to suit their nefarious designs evolved as Islamabad-Beijing axis, particularly targeted against India. Political System As regards political set up in the PoK - the political system is copied from the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy that characterizes Great Britain- with its capital located at Muzaffarabad. The President of Azad Kashmir is the titular head of the state and the prime minister is the real chief executive of the government as well as the polity, helped by a Council of Ministers. The unicameral Azad Jammu and Kashmir legislative Assembly elects both the Prime Minister and the President. There exists its own Supreme Court and a High Court in the state, while the Government of Pakistan s Ministry of Kashmir Affairs serves as a link between itself and the government of the PoK. Neither Azad Kashmir nor Gilgit-Baltistan elect members to Pakistan s National Assembly which proves that neither of these disputed political units owe allegiance to the sovereignty of Pakistan. Pakistan s gamble While integrating Gilgit Baltistan as its province by Pakistan may look a win-win game for both Beijing and Islamabad but it may result as a hard pie to swallow because that shall be construed as severing Islamabad s link with Kashmir. Since the region had been designated as disputed because of its Kashmir connection, it (Gilgit Baltistan) has been perpetually suffering from a state of political deficit or deprivation and disempowerment ever since partition of India and creation of Pakistan in1947. What is very pertinent here is the fact that a provision in Pakistan s Constitution circumvents the region with the future 22 World Focus July 2017

23 of the Kashmir issue. In fact the Article 257 of Pakistan s Constitution particularly deals with the country s relations with those parts of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir lying under its hold. The article provides: When the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir decide to accede to Pakistan, the relationship between Pakistan and the State shall be determined in accordance with the wishes of the people of that State. Obviously the question arises as to why and how Pakistan assumed this responsibility of deciding the future of the region. From where did it get the mandate to do so? As the Gilgit Baltistan s provincial status issue is primarily being viewed through the wider prism of likely implications and fallout on the country s broad Kashmir strategy in Pakistan, the formalisation of Gilgit Baltistan s political status as a province may necessitate re-formulating the fundamental contours of Pakistan s Kashmir strategy. Thus, apart from significant constitutional amendments, Pakistan would need to watch as to how India views the issue and reacts to this change. It is believed that Pakistan acquiring a part of PoK may set a steady precedent for India and bestow a viable fall back option if it decides to think in terms of the full integration of the state of J&K. Indeed, Gilgit Baltistan s integration into Pakistan is bound to consolidate the supporters within India advocating J&K s full integration into the Union of India because Kashmir continues to be the lifeblood of Pakistan s India project. It is the focus of Pakistan s proxies against India - a justification for committing aggression and an excuse to interfere into internal affairs of the country on false grounds of human rights violations and suppressing the demand of independence. In fact, these contending views as regards Gilgit Baltistan s provincial status issue prevail upon Pakistan s policy makers to resort to long drawn contemplation and purported hesitations. While Pakistan may be looking for a middle path solution without compromising its declared positon on Kashmir, it is difficult to comprehend weather the country is preparing to give up its persisting hostile policy against India and instead totally subscribe to China s economic agenda. Also the move to integrate Gilgit Baltistan would cost dear to Pakistan, considering the largescale support it enjoys among Kashmiri separatists in India. In fact these separatists and their leaders in J&K have all along been propped up or nurtured by Pakistan and its secret agency ISI for decades. Obviously they have firmly refuted the very idea of according provincial status to Gilgit Baltistan. India s concerns If the September 17 attack on an Army camp in Uri is a reminder of the military challenge India still confronts in Jammu and Kashmir, Prime Minister Narendra Modi s resolve to become firm and assertive on Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (POK) must be considered as a significant development hitherto unknown in the realm of Indian diplomacy barring few exceptions noticed in the regime of Late PM Indira Gandhi. In fact, assertiveness on this issue should have been Indian policy as soon as it became clear that UN Security Council resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir could not be implemented because of Pakistan s intransigence in observing the mandated first steps. After succeeding in asserting its total control over PoK, Pakistan focused its attention towards J&K, particularly the Kashmir valley and began fomenting all kinds of vicious and heinous troubles which it continues unrestrained still today. Until and unless there is pressure on Pakistan in PoK, including Gilgit Baltistan, Islamabad is unlikely to mend its ongoing ways in Jammu and Kashmir. Therefore, Prime Minister Modi s decision to be more proactive in PoK has come as a breath of fresh air. India now needs to go through all out and with full might to overcome this challenge. Indian leaders and diplomats must forge close contacts with prominent leaders of the different regions in the PoK, including Gilgit Baltistan, who are living in exile because of Pakistan s brute and horrific policies; highlight the cases of blatant violations of human rights in the region; expose Pakistan s double standards with respect to the PoK; and extend all out moral support to the local leaders and people at large in their fight against Pakistani occupation. Fortunately, with a predominant Muslim population, the region was once highly critical of the plebiscite demand repeatedly harped by Pakistan. Unfortunately today the region stands as a tool for protecting and advancing Islamabad s strategic goals. Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) & India 23

24 Being handed transient structures of governance for decades, the region later became a commodity of tussle between AJK and Pakistan. While totally resisting the proposed provincial status, AJK has thrown the gauntlet to regain its influence and control over Gilgit Baltistan, against the prospects of bolstering its political roadmap in Kashmir by consolidating its support. Hence, the proposal to accord provincial status to Gilgit Baltistan will only conform to a long-sustained pattern of Pakistan s political experiments in the region with a view to achieve an edge vis-a-vis India and also to justify its ongoing butchery and criminal conspiracy committed by its armed forces and premier security agency ISI respectively in the region and also in the entire Indian state so as to extract even if it be a little bit of solace against its massive defeats repeatedly by the hand of the India armed forces. Without affording its legalconstitutional status, Pakistan has linked and de-linked Gilgit Baltistan from the Kashmir issue only to fulfil its narrow strategic purposes. China s deep-rooted game It is quite obvious that the ongoing debate on provincial status for Gilgit Baltistan is only a facsimile of what transpired in late 2015 and early 2016, as the then current debate on provincial status was almost similar to the present discourse and also that the probability concerning a possible Chinese hand existed then as well. Even as long back as in the mid-1980s, the Gilgit Baltistan Bar Association too demanded that the region be made a province of Pakistan. Hence the demand of provincial status existed much well before the Chinese stakes became deeply involved. And it has been estimated that the popularity of such a demand is quite high. Notwithstanding this fact, the inevitability and possibility of the Chinese dimension based on CPEC prospects cannot be overlooked because that as a driving force in the current spate of deliberations must hold ground. The China factor has, indeed, added a fresh lease of life and speculation at least in the present leg when a renewed effort to constitutionally empower Gilgit Baltistan is actively being made by both Beijing and Islamabad. It is obvious that the complete merger of the PoK into Pakistan would inevitably favour China. Having control of a significant portion of the region- the Trans Karakoram Tract- the Chinese strategy and interests will be best protected with Gilgit Baltistan remaining under control of Pakistan. Secondly, China s conservative risk prevention strategy of precious investments conflict with endangering billions in a disputed territory having only a provisional status and still having the undecided future because that is slated to be re-negotiated (by China s own admission) as per Article 6 of the Sino-Pakistan Border Agreement Thus the so emerging security constraints due to evolving Beijing-Islamabad axis are significantly against the Indian national interests and that demands India-Pakistan talks to continue against all odds so that even a few chances of some fruitful negotiations may always remain alive to avoid any possibility of war between the two nations as both are now nuclear powers and it is futile to wage a nuclear war because in such a war there is neither victor nor vanquished. India-Pakistan talks must continue And that the historic Shimla Agreement of 1972 between the two neigbouring countries mandates to resolve all their outstanding issues only bilaterally without any external mediation or interference. Since Pakistan is illegally occupying a large part of Indian territory India, instead of watching meekly, must carry over this issue at all for a to pressurize Pakistan to come to negotiation table for meaningful talks. In fact, India s long held inertia vis-a-vis PoK in the past has led to the creation of a false mindset among a large section of Indians and also others in the world who consider that any dialogue between India and Pakistan on Kashmir issue means discussions about the future of Kashmir valley. But PM Modi has done away with this wrong perception with his masterstroke and has rightly expanded the country s stand on PoK which must include Gilgit Baltistan and that will go a long way in changing the earlier mindset. Hence in any forthcoming bilateral talks with Pakistan, India must insist on keeping the Kashmir issue at the top of the agenda, besides putting pressure upon Islamabad to vacate the areas under its illegal occupation and must stop aiding and abetting militancy and terrorism inside its territory. India has so far been reluctant to talk about Kashmir at international fora thereby creating an incorrect perception about its actual position which has been deliberately distorted by Pakistan just to conceal its own mischief and crookedness. This needs to be drastically changed at the earliest. India must not only come out clear with its stand on Kashmir and expose Pakistan s duplicity 24 World Focus July 2017

25 in bilateral discussions with friendly countries, it must expose to the world about the unholy nexus with militants and terrorist groups of all kinds to whom Pakistan has provided shelter inside its territory and other logistic facilities with the sole objective to disturb and destroy India at any cost. In short the external dimension of the Kashmir issue for India ought to include the following items: 1.To be more proactive and assertive and also be genuinely offensive if the need so arises about its rightful claim on PoK including Gilgit-Baltistan; 2.Must include Kashmir in the agenda for bilateral discussions with Pakistan in which India should press for Pakistan to vacate the area under its illegal occupation; 3.Immediately launch a massive diplomatic exercise with all friendly countries so as to explain its policy on Kashmir; and 4.Must expose all the heinous and barbaric atrocities that Pakistani forces have inflicted upon innocent Indian soldiers and such civilians so far. Besides highlighting the external dimension of the Kashmir issue, there is also a need for India to seriously ponder over the internal dimensions as well and to go in for the necessary course correction wherever required. India: logic, deductions, options Although the incorporation of Gilgit Baltistan- if so happens - into Pakistan s territory may considerably undermine India s claim on the region but it cannot altogether remove it, because irrespective of the unlawful incorporation India will continue to uphold its claim more vociferously on both parts of PoK as it has been doing since Though on the domestic front India s policy on PoK has been dismissed as being inert and least assertive since the very beginning but that cannot be an alibi for not initiating the lawful demand afresh. And that exactly is being done under the new political dispensation led by PM Modi wherein a concerted effort is being made to alter the previously held perception that PoK is a peripheral issue on the list of India s strategic priorities. While boldly raising issues concerning PoK, be it compensation for refugees or protection of their human rights with dignity, Prime Minister Modi s reference on this issue in his Independence Day address, and the heightened frequency of official public statements on the PoK do indicate that India could well be thinking in terms of re-drawing the rules of engagement. Lately, Gilgit Baltistan in particular has significantly been elevated into India s strategic calculations due to the Chinese foray into the region. These besides, the extant territorial claim on this region considerably validate India s objections pertaining to formation of the CPEC. Although both Pakistan and China ostensibly wish to prioritise their economic prospects in a shared manner through the process of incorporating Gilgit Baltistan yet the entire endeavour reflect their greed of territorial expansion. Their common agenda is amply clear before policy makers in India and New Delhi, in all likelihood, may not subscribe to complement their approach this time. A standing territorial claim lies in India s potential strategic options against consolidating Beijing-Islamabad nexus in PoK and India must not take risk to abandon it at this moment. As is crystal clear from the past experience that India-Pakistan bilateral endeavour as regards retaining permanent status quo has not succeeded despite all best proclamations and projection, as a consequence- for any possibility of future successits fundamental thrust needs to diverge from preexisting notions and needs to redefine its overall strategy with a view to reinforce its policy on PoK. In times of a perceptible qualitative shift in policy formulation and posturing, Gilgit Baltistan s absorption will yield India an opportunity to re-explore its options in terms of restoring peace, stability and normalcy in J&K. Obviously India may explore more options to choose to engage more with such drastic views as abrogating Art 370 which can pave way for J&K s complete and final integration with the Union of India. But just not by invoking legal provisions or announcing political resolutions as regards J&K, enough will remain to manage the ground as it obtains today in the valley as well as in the entire state. Managing the internal situation As the prevailing internal situation in the valley as well as in the state is highly tense and quite grim, the top priority ought to be given to normalize it anyhow and all efforts at present should be directed towards Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) & India 25

26 the particular end. But extra care must be observed by law enforcing agencies to heal the hapless majority reeling under bruises and scares and permanent loss of their departed beloved one s caused by the long spell of militancy and terror in the state. The most crucial issue is how the government of India deals with so-called anti-national or separatist elements. In fact, these separatists in Kashmir include both pro-pakistan and pro-independence population - who possess different goals to pursue. Hence putting all of them together under the label separatists and dealing with them as a single entity does not seem to be a rational approach. Hence, the pro-pakistan and pro-independence elements should be clearly distinguished and should be handled accordingly. Though in a different context, even the Supreme Court of India has also objected to loosely labelling any one as a separatist or a terrorist ; therefore the prosecution agencies must abide by the directive of the apex court. As far as pro-pakistan elements are concerned, they should be so categorised by giving them wide access and publicity to the treatment meted out to ethnic minorities in Pakistan that they may understand the true motive of Pakistan and may not get be fooled by Pakistani tactics. It would be very pertinent here to explain to the Kashmiri natives about how the Punjabi-dominated Pakistani regime treated Bengali Muslims and how it continues to treat Balochs, Pashtuns, Sindhis, Muhajirs and even the people of PoK especially Gilgit-Baltistan and that will certainly cripple the Pakistani hold over pro-pak elements. There should be no room for any talks with these elements if they fail to mend their so-practiced ways, nor should any facility be extended to them except those which is under the rule of law. With respect to pro-independence elements, however, the government should be open heartedly provide maximum opportunities to engage them in a proper way. Further, the fact that Islamabad is against independence and is striving only for the merger of the region with Pakistan should repeatedly be reiterated to them thus highlighting the fact that the Pakistani establishment has a totally different agenda. Secondly, the growth of radical Islam in Kashmir is another area of grave concern. The strategy of radical Islamists/ jihadi militants, who have a global agenda, has been to come forward with financial and military assistance wherever Muslims are fighting for their rights or against their genuine or perceived grievances. Thereafter, they gradually take over control of the movement and inflict untold barbarity and macabre crimes upon them as is seen in case of Islamic terrorist (ISIS) of Iraq and Syria. Kashmiri Muslims need to be cautioned about this, as it threatens their long evolved distinguishing culture of tolerance characterized as Sufism. The growth of radical Islam as propagated by Wahabis/ Salafis in the Valley would not only change their way of life but could also drag Kashmiri Muslims into wider international conflicts for their inevitable destruction. Thirdly, the long and continued deployment of the army and para-military forces in the valley may become counterproductive as it may result into the gradual decline in their discipline and effectiveness. Hence the army should be deployed in short spurts in selected areas on a need-to-use basis and withdrawn as soon as possible after restoring peace and stability. Similarly, instead of the continued imposition of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, it be also imposed on the requirement and then be lifted and be confined to areas actually affected by militancy and terrorism. Fourthly, the issue relating to abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian constitution, which gives special status to Jammu and Kashmir, should be temporarily set aside in the larger national interest because the situation is still not ripe today in the valley lest the situation may deteriorate to become like that of earlier Bosnia and Herzegovina of 1990s or as there obtains in Syria and Iraq. In addition, the government of India, in conjunction with the state government, must consider short-term, mid-term and long-term measures which may help assuage the hurt and bruised sentiments of ordinary Kashmiris by bridging the trust deficit and bringing them closer to the national mainstream. These could include promoting infrastructural, industrial and other social and economic developments in the region and creating more job opportunities besides promoting sports and cultural activities is one way of keeping youth in the valley engaged and away from disruptive and criminal activities. Similarly, their induction in the 26 World Focus July 2017

27 para-military forces, including the central armed police forces should also be considered as an effective measure of entrusting them with responsibilities of nation building. Conclusion Undoubtedly, the utmost priority today should be to restore normalcy and law and order in the valley in any way possible within the framework of rule of law as well as that of Nature so as to bring the prevailing extremely grim ground situation in the Kashmir valley under perfect control. But simultaneously, the Indian government should consider the complex issue in a holistic manner by learning from the past mistakes and take innovative and bold measures to solve this vexed issue. As an option Prime Minister Modi s initiative of evolving and practicing an assertive and muscular foreign policy not only as regards PoK - as was seen during the surgical strike in the PoK and earlier a year before in Myanmar but also elsewhere - may prove to be a milestone towards opening for more such actions to follow towards resolving all such pending complex issues towards their positive and lasting solution. But, at the same time, the eternal moral values like, peace, truth, love and justice etc. have no substitutes to invoke upon and use for progress and welfare of humanity in the world. Perhaps both PM Modi and PM Nawaz Sharieff understand it very well. In fact no issue, howsoever complex it may be, is unresolvable as nothing is beyond human endeavor. References Early day motion 1107, Annexation of Gilgit-Baltistan by Pakistan as its fifth frontier, The British Parliament, March 23, 2017, at /1107 Kashmir in Turmoil 2016, South Asia Politics, New Delhi, Vol. 15, No. 9, Jan. 2017, P 44. Navnita Chadha Behera, Demystifying Kashmir, Pearson-Longman, New Delhi, 2006, p Nirupama Subramanian, Gilgit-Baltistan: Alienation is an issue, but no connect to India, The Indian Express, June 9, 2015, at explained/gilgit-baltistan-alienation-is-an-issue-but-noconnect-to-india/ Noor-Ul-Qamrain, Geelani warns Pakistan about Gilgit, Baltistan, The Sunday Guardian, August 1, 2015, at Priyanka Singh, Gilgit Baltistan: Province, No Province? IDSA Comment, August 27, 2015, at / w w w. i d s a. i n / i d s a c o m m e n t s / GilgitBaltistanProvinceNoProvince _psingh_ Priyanka Singh, Gilgit Baltistan as Fifth Province: Reconciling with the Status Quo? IDSA Comment, March 4, 2016, at gilgit-baltistan-as-fifth-province_psingh_ Syed-Ansar-Hussain, Gilgit-Baltistan in limbo, Dawn, January 8, 2013, at Tariq Naqash, AJK govt opposes moves to convert GB into province, Dawn, January 10, 2016, at The Boundary Agreement between China and Pakistan, 1963, at /04/China-Pakistan-1963.pdf The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, at _951.pdf, p.151 The Fifth Province, The Nation, June 7, 2015, at For any clarifications and queries regarding subscriptions, kindly just send an to us at cnfworldfocus@gmail.com for our record as we discourage telephonic conversations. After receiving your , we will get back to you. Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) & India 27

28 Current Affairs In working out an out of the box solution of our border disputes and supporting in the practical and realistic trilateral peace process between India, Pakistan and China, the Modi Government is moving with times for the good of all will stand reinforced, winning global support. To do this we must realize that the settlement with Pakistan and China needs to be trilateral, with India, China and Pakistan being an integral part of the settlement. We can easily close our border issues with China and Pakistan on a trilateral basis, particularly based on ground realities today where it has become more of a regional issue particularly in light of OBOR, and trade and economy among the three nations. Under current ground realities, no Pakistan civil government can settle its border issue with India on its own and remain in power as it needs the Kavach of the so called big powers to survive politically after signing up for peace with India. This is a reality for all to see. Historically, India s Prime Minister Sh. Vajpayee decided to start a process of settlement with Pakistan in 1999, as he saw that despite two decisive wins of war by Indira Gandhi and Lal Bahadur Shastri, there was no political move by India to take over the parts of Kashmir held by Pakistan. Sh. Vajpayee brought in peace talks with President Musharraf in Lahore that almost saw a resolution to the border issue. When asked by Farooq Abdullah about the peace talks, Sh. Vajpayee informed (as reported by PTI): I have suggested to Pakistan President Musharraf that you keep this part [Kashmir] with you and we will keep ours, this way we will settle the [Kashmir] issue and also set right the Line of Control. Trilateral Solution to the Kashmir Issue: Not Bilateral! G. Kishore Babu In 1960, the then Chinese premier, Chou En Lai had written to Nehru; In order to maintain effectively the status quo of the border between the two countries, to ensure the tranquillity of the border regions and create a favourable atmosphere for a friendly settlement of the boundary question, the Chinese government proposes that the armed forces 28 World Focus July 2017 of China and India each withdraw 20 kilometres at once from the so called Mc Mahon line in the east, and from the line up to which each side exercises actual control in the west. However, in 1980, Deng Xiaoping was willing to settle the border issue on status quo of 1980 and not 1960 as Chou En Lai had offered Nehru. In 1982 the Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping offered a proposal to the Indians to settle the Indo-Chinese border on a As is and where is basis. Best possible solution of swapping our interests in Aksai Chin while retaining our interests in Arunachal also came up during the Vajpayee administration. It appears however that lack of political mandate did not allow any further development. Prime Minister Sh. Vajpayee almost settled the border issue with Pakistan (who got Pakistan to agree on the proposal of you keep your part of Kashmir we keep our part, a little give and take to make the border region better to administrate and close the issue) and was working on settling the Indo- China issue. If re-elected Sh. Vajpayee would have solved both the Indo- Pakistan and the Indo- China border issues. But lack of Political Majority and time subsequently did not let it happen. Of all things said about China it foremost wants peace in the area as it does not want escalation of the independence movement in the Xinjiang and Tibet provinces. It was willing to settle along the international border of the Mc Mahon line in the East giving us Arunachal Pradesh, as it has accepted the Mc Mahon line as the border of Sikkim and China and in the West the issue is still open to negotiations, as the Chinese agreed to settle with the Mc Cartney- Mc Donald line, offered by Chou En Lai on a As is and where is basis. Before the 1962 war or the one before that, the Johnson Line drawn in 1865 by the British becoming the border with Tibet or the Johnson- Ardagh line. The British had different border lines at different times to keep away different enemies from coming to their possession of India. The borders were used as

29 Kavachs to protect their Sone Ki Chidia. Decades later Prime Minister Sh. Modi is trying to bring in ethical ways of governance for the first time in 70 years of Independent India, who is showing a great magnanimous vision and has successfully settled the 70 year old dispute with Bangladesh to the satisfaction of all, winning global recognition for the same. Prime Minister Modi stresses that India alone cannot walk the talk of peace, others should also move which is true. The issue of Ratification by Parliament of any give and take of land in the tri-lateral settlement with Pakistan and China and the issue of the subject being part of the preamble or not of the Constitution of India, we see the following two issues. Firstly, the Berubari land dispute in Eastern India was a creation of the border demarcation done in a hurry by Sir Radcliffe, some omissions were in the written texts that led to this issue. The Berubari dispute was resolved by Nehru-Noor agreement in By amendment of the Constitution by Parliament using power of Article 368. The Government is said to have readied the amendments to Articles in the Constitution that will have to be looked into, to let the border disputes be settled, Preamble part of Constitution or not is a separate issue, the same issue was seen differently by different people, at different times, all eminent judges of the same Honourable Supreme Court. Secondly, later on Indira Gandhi gifted to Sri Lanka the Kachchatheevu Island, for peace and good neighbourly relations, a petition was filed in the Supreme Court that the matter was not ratified by parliament, to which the Indian Government stated. No territory belonging to India was ceded nor sovereignty relinquished since the area was in dispute and had never been demarcated. Much of India s borders were never demarcated by British India, so these border issues are pending to be sorted out. In the event of the Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Yi s recent visit to Kabul and Islamabad and his attempts to resolve contentious issues between Afghanistan and Pakistan, there have been diplomatic anxieties in many quarters regarding China s latest efforts in pressurizing Pakistan authorities to reign in terrorist networks in Afghanistan. This seems as a novel experiment of China s sincere overtures in curbing the menace of terrorism initially. But it is possible at a later phase that China may also mediate between India and Pakistan for maintaining peace in the region. These new strange developments may change the geo-strategic scenario completely and unfold unexpected possibilities for future balance of power in the region. I Want To Show The People Of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir... : PM Narendra Modi s Top 5 Quotes April 02, :14 IST NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Narendra Modi today inaugurated India s longest road tunnel on the Jammu-Srinagar National Highway. The tunnel cuts short the journey between the two cities by 30 km and reduces travel time by two hours. He later addressed a rally in Jammu s Udhampur, the headquarters of the army s North Command. Here are the top five quotes from PM Modi s speech: 1. I want to tell the youth of Kashmir Valley what is the strength of a stone. On one side, misguided youth are throwing stones and on the other side there are youth breaking stones to build Kashmir s future. 2. I want to tell the people of Kashmir, you have two roads in front of you - tourism and terrorism. For last 40 years so much blood has spilled, but nothing has been achieved. If anybody has lost anything, it is the mother who lost the son. If tourism would have been made the focus in the last 40 years, Kashmir would be the hub of tourists. 3. Those who on the other side can t control themselves. I want to show the people of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) how Jammu and Kashmir can develop. Let people of PoK see what is development so that they know the exploitation that they have suffered from those controlling them. 4. Every person of the state remembers Atal Bihari Vajpayee - the motto of Kashmiriyat Insaniyat and Jamhuriyat will be taken forward by us to march ahead. 5. This tunnel will change the fortunes of the valley s farmers, their produce will not rot due to road closures. (Courtesy: Trilateral Solution to the Kashmir Issue: Not Bilateral! 29

30 Confidence Building Measures Travel and Trade Across LOC Dr. B. Srinivas, IPS Among a series of Confidence Building Measures that have been put in place over the past one decade to ease the tension between India and Pakistan, the twin Confidence Building Measures of LOC Travel and LOC Trade have stood the test of times and are in operation, al beit, with interruptions during periods of heightened hostility between the two neighbours. The Confidence Building Measure aimed at building trust among the border populations on either side of LOC made a modest beginning and it has forged the reunion of many of the undivided families on either side. The opening up of more routes to permit foot crossings, though is said to have its own security implications, would certainly enhance the bonhomie among the border populace. The LOC Trade has the added dimension to the people to people contact and bring forth the economic relations between the two populations. The barter trade, despite its short comings and inadequacies, had opened up new economic opportunities among the traders on both sides of the LOC. The emotional reunion and the economic activities bringing together the earlier undivided families, in a small measure, are contributing to make the borders less irrelevant. Promotion of trade in different routes and promotion of travel for educational and religious tourism would go a long way in easing out tensions among the two neighbours in a significant way and these twin Confidence Building Measure can always set the ground for further peace initiatives. Relations between India and Pakistan, since partition, have been under strain due to the historical and political factors. Jammu and Kashmir continues to be the main thaw in resolving many a issue that keep both the neighbours at the threshold of perpetual confrontation. A number of initiatives over the decades including Tashkent declaration, Shimla Agreement, Lahore Bus ride and Agra Summit, from time to time, made the political establishment in both countries to revisit and attempt to resolve many issues. However, Kashmir continues to be the major area of concern where in the past three decades witnessed increased insurgency activities, Kargil incursions and of late, serious internal security challenges with street protests and militancy, aided and supported by the neighbour from across. Notwithstanding the setbacks in the peace initiatives, Indian Government has continuously engaged with the Pakistan establishment and pushed for composite dialogue. One of the main components of the composite dialogue and the recommendations of the Joint Working Group set up by the Indian Prime Minister has been the initiative to make borders irrelevant or less relevant without compromising on the long stated positions. It is towards this end that a number of Confidence Building Measures were put into place between India and Pakistan, in general and between Jammu and Kashmir and Pak Occupied Kashmir, in Particular. Among all the Confidence Building Measures that were reached between India and Pakistan, two major activities that continue to operate despite the hostilities between the two neighbours have been the Cross LOC Trade and the Cross LOC Travel. As a part of the composite dialogue between India and Pakistan and as a measure towards increasing people to people contact on both sides of Kashmir, the twin mechanisms of Cross LOC Trade and Cross LOC Travel got into place and both the Confidence Building Measure are standing the test of hard times in the past more than one decade. The lofty ideals of making borders irrelevant may not have become a reality but certainly these measures created a congenial atmosphere among the populace on both sides of Kashmir and giving filllip to the peace process. Cross LOC Travel The Cross LOC travel between Srinagar, the summer capital of Jammu and Kashmir and Muzaffarabad in 30 World Focus July 2017

31 Pak Occupied Kashmir was the first people to people contact that got initiated through a bus service on April 7, It may be relevant to note that the inaugural bus service was preluded by a major terrorist suicide attack at the Tourist Reception Centre in Srinagar a day prior to the rollout of the bus service. In a dastardly attack, two terrorists entered the Tourist Reception Centre and launched a major attack in the premises where a number of civilians and the passengers bound by the inaugural bus service were staying. The counter terrorist operation had, however, neutralized the terrorists and the civilians as well as passengers of the bus service were rescued. Undithered by the terrorist threat, the bus service was inaugurated the next day by the Indian Prime Minister and the bus service continues to date, al beit, with occasional interruptions when hostilities between the two neighbours run high or when the operation of the bus service becomes difficult due to serious law and order and militancy related disturbances in North Kashmir through which the bus traverses. The Srinagar-Muzaffrabad Service, connecting Kashmir with Pak Occupied Kashmir brings in the message of peace and people to people contact on both sides of Kashmir. The bus service is aptly Christened as Karwan-e-Aman and covers a distance of 170 kms. which, after leaving Srinagar reaches what is popularly known as Aman Setu or bridge of peace at the Line of Control in the Uri Sector of Baramulla district in North Kashmir and then moves into Pak Occupied Kashmir towards Muzaffarabad. It is important to note that the buses are not allowed to cross the Aman Setu. The passengers are alighted from the vehicles near Aman Setu and Cross the bridge by foot and get into the waiting vehicles on the other side of the bridge and move to Muzaffarabad. Similarly, passengers from Pak Occupied Kashmir who reach the other side of Aman Setu cross the bridge and board the waiting SRTC vehicles to travel to Srinagar. The dynamics of the travel between the two sides deserves a mention as it stands out as the most serious Confidence Building Measure between India and Pakistan to facilitate re-union between the families divided by the Line of Control. The Indian citizens of Jammu and Kashmir get the travel permits from the Regional Passport Officer, Srinagar after due security vettings by the later. The Srinagar Muzaffrabad Bus Service which got started with great fanfare had its major hiccup with serious disruption in the wake of 2005 earth quake in Pak Occupied Kashmir and other neighboring areas. The quake had damaged the lifeline connectivity of the cross LOC travel and it took a while for restoration of the road and resumption of the service. As a sequel to the cross LOC travel in the Kashmir region, both India and Pakistan have launched another cross LOC Bus Service in 2006 where in the Poonch region of Jammu got connected to Rawalkot on the other side of Kashmir. Further, to encourage the reunion of the divided families on either side of LOC, both India and Pakistan have announced the opening of foot crossings at Titwal in Karna region in Kupwara district in Kashmir. Similar foot crossing have been considered for a few other places in Jammu region too. The Confidence Building Measure of cross LOC travel is bringing with it some attendant security concerns. Despite all the security clearances and vetting being done on both sides of Kashmir, terrorist groups have still succeeded in using this travel exercise to advance its own design. A number of recoveries related to fake currency, Pakistan SIM Cards, satellite phones and at times, empty cartridges and ammunition besides objectionable documents were said to have been recovered from the passengers in both the bus services and legal processes were said to be set into motion against such defaulter passengers. Despite these aberrations noticed occasionally, cross LOC travel has turned out to be a major Confidence Building Measure for uniting the people on both sides and easing out the restrictions on the meetings among the families of undivided Kashmir. The cross LOC travel which started on a fortnightly basis had soon become a weekly service and the travel profile over the years is certainly encouring. It has been noted that more Pak Occupied Kashmir nationals visit Indian side in each bus in both the routes. It is estimated that more than 5000 people used the LOC travel opportunity from Pak Occupied Kashmir into Kashmir where as people have availed the LOC travel into Poonch from Rawalkote. The number of People travelling to Pak Occupied Confidence Building Measures Travel and Trade Across LOC 31

32 Kashmir from Kashmir side is nearly half the number of the Pak Occupied Kashmir arrivals in both the routes and thus there are regular arrivals and departures of people from both sides of Kashmir, making the Confidence Building Measure a very encouraging exercise. A long term proposal that could be considered in the cross LOC travel would be to extend it to religious and educational tourism among the people of Kashmir and Pak Occupied Kashmir. With better educational facilities on Indian side of Kashmir, people of Pak Occupied Kashmir could get an opportunity to get sensitized on the educational avenues in Kashmir. Similarly, Kashmir has a plethora of sufi Shrines and other religious institutions which could open a new wave of tolerant thought for the Kashmiri populace on the other side. Besides religious and educational tourism, the breath taking beauty of Kashmir all along the Jheelum river could be a paradise to re-visit by the people of Kashmir origin on the other side. Needless to mention, some of the Hindu and Muslim religious shrines in Pak Occupied Kashmir would also give an opportunity to the people on Indian side of Kashmir to appreciate the historical sufi tradition that pervaded in entire Jammu and Kashmir region for centuries. The experience of the decade of LOC travel between the two sides of Kashmir has certainly been encouraging. There is enthusiasm among the residents of Jammu and Kashmir on both sides of LOC and the cross LOC interactions are not only increasing but are also ending up in restoring old familial ties with marriages among some of the families. The clearances and procedural impediments which were experienced in the initial stages are giving way to more practical and pragmatic procedural norms easing out many restrictions and the best beneficiaries are the immediate residents of either side of Kashmir and the call, thus for the opening more crossings to integrate people from Kashmir and Pak Occupied Kashmir would require a serious consideration. A lot of refinement and flexibility, however, could be introduced into issue of travel permits to encourage the LOC travel. To ease out the restrictions on cross LOC travel and also bring in more flexibility, there was a need felt by government to consider simplifications of entry permit procedures. As a part of the flexibility norms, the procedures got refined with the introduction of triple entry permit for cross LOC travel. The emphasis is also being laid on simplifying the time period for getting the permits which, at times, takes more than one year. To reduce the time taken for clearances, regular co-ordination meetings are being held by the Regional Passport Officer to facilitate clearances on fast track basis which get delayed at security agencies. Clearances for travel are being expedited in emergency cases relating to death of relatives in Kashmir or Pak Occupied Kashmir. In Kashmir as well as Pak Occupied Kashmir, efforts are being made to create facilities like waiting areas at operational crossing points to make the travel between Kashmir and Pak Occupied Kashmir much more flexible and less cumbersome. After all, the cross LOC travel is the main Confidence Building Measure that has the human and family narrative at all times since the first bus rolled out from Kashmir to Pak Occupied Kashmir and it is standing test of all times, including the periods of high hostility. Cross LOC Trade The second major Confidence Building Measure in place between the two sides of Kashmir relates to the cross LOC Trade. The Cross LOC Travel experiment and experience from 2005 soon gave way to greater expectations and in pursuance of the Prime Ministers working Group recommendations on Cross LOC Confidence Building Measures, the engagement of people of Jammu and Kashmir with people of Pak Occupied Kashmir through trade related activity was put into place. The Primary emphasis was to have the local produce of Jammu and Kashmir to be traded in Pak Occupied Kashmir and vice versa. In other words, the Prime products grown or manufactured in either side of Kashmir were to be brought under the ambit of Cross LOC Trade. A general consensus on LOC Trade, thus, was arrived in 2006, within one year of the initiation of LOC travel. The institutionalization of LOC trade mechanism has its own prelude. It may be pertinent to mention that in the early summer of 2008, Jammu and Kashmir State had witnessed serious law and order concerns in the wake of Amarnath Land row agitation. The agitation which ran for over a month 32 World Focus July 2017

33 had led to a serious situation with Kashmiri traders finding it difficult to transport their produce and goods into Jammu region and beyond into Punjab and Delhi. The Kashmir traders suffered hugely and the separatist elements in Kashmir used this opportunity to call this as an economic blockade of Kashmir by Jammu and gave a call for Muzaffrabad challo, where in the Kashmir apple growers were asked to carry their produce to Muzaffrabad from Kashmir in a convoy of trucks. The call evoked a serious response with a huge number of people participating in the Muzaffrabad challo in June 2008 and the misadventure was averted by timely action by the security establishment. This episode has certainly hastened the otherwise in pipeline of the Confidence Building Measure of Cross LOC Trade and in October 2008, the LOC Trade between Kashmir and Pak Occupied Kashmir had formally got initiated. A similar LOC Trade route got activated simultaneously between Poonch in J&K and Rawalkote in Pak Occupied Kashmir. To facilitate the Cross LOC Trade, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) has been put in place which mandates the role and responsibilities of various stake holders. The SOP deals with the items approved for trade, the modalities related to the movement of trucks, dimensions of article and packed goods, the movement of vehicles in a convoy with security, the code of conduct for the drivers and the timings for arrival and departure for the vehicles from both sides of Kashmir. The significant aspect of the LOC Trade relates to the articles to be traded. A list of 21 items of Kashmir origin from Indian side are permitted to be traded into Pak Occupied Kashmir and similarly a list of 21 items have been approved for the import from Pak Occupied Kashmir into Jammu and Kashmir on Indian side. The Indian side exports carpets, rugs, shawls, Namdas, Fresh fruit, vegetables, saffron, walnut, Kashmir Spices, paper mache products etc. The Indian imports include Peshawari leather items, dry fruits, precious stones, medicinal herbs, wall hangings, foam mattresses etc. The LOC trade, which has started as a symbolic commodity trade has started with an average of 15 trucks from each side and over the years it has reached upto 25 trucks for each side and is in operations for three to four days a week. The striking, and of course, prime feature of this LOC trade is that it operates as a barter trade and continues to be a bone of contention between the two sides of Kashmir. There has been no banking mechanism involved in the trade as a result there is a very little check over the issues related to over invoicing by the traders. The traders from Indian side in Kashmir have been insisting for setting up Banking facilitates for LOC trade. The Indian government has also been making a serious effort to convince the Pakistan side for opening banking facilities but the same is yet to be put into place as Pakistan insists that LOC is not an international border and maintains that banking facilities in LOC trade cannot be acceptable till the all the issues related to Kashmir are not resolved. This uncertainty has had certainly an adverse impact on the trading activities in LOC trade as lot of imbalances are experienced in the barter by the traders. The dynamics of LOC trade is significant and needs to be understood in perspective. The institutional mechanism for the LOC trade operates from what is known as the Trade Facilitation Centre in Salamabad, Uri in Kashmir division and in Poonch in Jammu region. In the Pak Occupied Kashmir, the destination for Indian trucks is Chakoti in Muzaffarabad route and Rawalkote in Poonch route and both the destinations are not far off the zero point of the LOC. The SOP mandates that the trucks carrying the containers leave at a stipulated time in the morning hours from the respective Trade Facilitation Centre and return to their origin by evening after unloading the trade goods. Enroute, on both sides, trucks and drivers are subjected to customs checks as well as immigration formalities. The vehicles carrying the goods are to move in a convoy and get secured by adequate security deployments on the route and between the two facilitation centres on either side of Kashmir. It would take less than four hours to cover the trade route as they are less than 25 kms in distance from each other. Two important aspects of the containers carrying the goods deserve a special mention. In the first instance, the vehicle requires to be checked for its bonafides interims of the approved list of SOP Confidence Building Measures Travel and Trade Across LOC 33

34 items being carried. In the second phase, the materials require security check. In the absence of serious security equipment availability, the security checks are mostly done on a random basis and this leaves large scope for manipulation. The absence of full body scanners for checking the incoming and outgoing material has been a sources of security concern and reports of contraband, arms and unauthorized material being pushed though the barter trade by the Pak Occupied Kashmir traders have come to light. There were a number cases of drug smuggling that got registered against the drivers who carried such objectionable material and legal actions stand initiated. The important functionaries of the LOC trade including the trade facilitation officer, the custodian, the security and immigration officials besides the professionals associated with the checking of the products have their tasks well laid out and mandated under SOP. There are nearly 700 traders from Indian side of Kashmir and about 300 traders from Pak side who have made this barter trade sustain for the past 9 years. It is not surprising to note that many of the traders of both sides are related to each other and in fact, it is in this spirit of bringing together the people to people contact that the Confidence Building Measure of LOC trade got initiated. Like the LOC travel, the LOC trade has also got into regular halts during the periods of heightened hostilies between the two neighbours. However, there has been a dedicated effort by the government to push the Confidence Building Measure further to encourage the people to people contact at an economic level. It has been observed that in the past years of LOC trade, sizeable amount of goods have been bartered across the trade points. It is estimated that more than trucks of consignments have been exported from Indian side of Kashmir into Pak Occupied Kashmir accounting to approximately 2500 crores. The imports are also in an appreciable number with more than trucks from Pak Occupied Kashmir arriving into Indian side of Kashmir. On Poonch-Rawalkote (Pak Occupied Kashmir) sector too, the LOC trade dynamics has been encouraging. More than trucks proceeded from Jammu region into Pak Occupied Kashmir and more than trucks reported from Pak Occupied Kashmir into Poonch carrying trade items. It is observed that more than 750 crore of trade was registered in this barter trade. The LOC trade which is sustained by the familial ties among traders on either side of LOC needs to transcend into a larger economic activity. As of now, it has created stake holders in the villages and towns around the trade facilitation centre. For its expansion on to a bigger scale, there is lot to be done in terms of infrastructure, banking facilities, communication lines and expansion of the list of items that could be traded. The traders believe that apart from goods, the LOC trade could also incorporate services. The major concern in the LOC trade relates to the communication facilities between the traders on both sides. There is no direct communication between the traders and the traders cannot cross the LOC to meet their counterparts. Establishment of a few select points for communication in the trade route has eased out the concerns of traders only to a lesser extent. Security concerns over communications on both sides have limited the scope of interaction among the traders and the traders, at times, feel seriously handicapped to reach out to their counterparts. As of now, the trade operates only from two routes, one in Jammu region and another in Kashmir. It may be mentioned that there has been a great demand for opening of more trade routes and the Prime Minister working groups have also recommended a number of other routes including Jammu-Sialkot, Kargil-Skardu, Nowshera-Mirpur and a few more. Opening up of these routes may enhance the trade, economic co-operation and people to people contact on a larger canvass and this may augur well for the confidence building among the people of Kashmir and Pak Occupied Kashmir. The LOC Trade, with all lofty ideals, had its own limitations despite restricting itself to the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Traders from Punjab Delhi and other states have also plunged into the LOC trade through proxy traders from the local population and are in a position to dictate the course of the trade. This is an area where the authorities may need to exercise greater vigil to ensure the spirit of trade is maintained between two parts of Kashmir 34 World Focus July 2017

35 only and that traders beyond the border areas, both in Kashmir and Pak Occupied Kashmir would not run the trade by proxy. Future Ahead Both Cross LOC Travel and LOC Trade have turned out to be great levelers for bridging both the sides of Kashmir. They have helped the people of Kashmir living in border areas and the people of Pak Occupied Kashmir living in the villages on the side of LOC to reinvigorate their old ties and re-establish the familial linkages. The human dimension to the LOC travel has been supplemented by the economic dimension of the LOC trade and it is even contributing to the communal amity as many of the traders of Jammu region and Pak Occupied Kashmir are from different religions but sharing common economic ethos. This may, in the long run, will have positive impact on the attitudes and perceptions of people on both the sides. A number of inadequacies in the operation of these Confidence Building Measures, in terms of LOC Travel and LOC Trade came to be experienced over the years. Both the governments need to push for flexibility in making these Confidence Building Measure work with more ease. In case of LOC travel, issues concerning quick verification of passengers lists on both sides, less cumbersome documentation, opening up of more crossing points, extending LOC travel for educational and religious tourism could be considered. Similarly, in case of LOC trade, the issues of banking and communication facilities, adequate infrastructure, opening of more routes and enlarging the scope of LOC Trade could be considered to make it a viable economic option for the people living on both sides. Subscription Form New Subscription / Renewal from /. / to /... /... The Subscription charges through Demand Draft No... Dt /... / drawn on for World Focus payable at Delhi is enclosed. (Or) I am sending the amount by Money Order vide dated... Subscriber s Name:... My/Our Mailing Address is as follows (in Block Capitals) :.... City:... State:... Pin... Code... ID....Phone.. Subscription Rates : 1yr 2yrs 3yrs Rs Rs Rs Foreign (Air Mail) : 1yr 2yrs 3yrs $ 220 $ 440 $ 660 For Courier in New Delhi Rs. 400/- extra for one year (Includes packing charges), and for Outstation Rs. 700/- for one year (Includes packing charges). For Speed Post Rs. 900 (Outstation) Single Copy Rs. 100/- Confidence Building Measures Travel and Trade Across LOC 35

36 Kashmir Valley has been on the boil once again after the decimation of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani in mid Relationship with Pakistan has gone down subsequently with consequent escalation of violence in Kashmir. Protestors and police have been clashing in the Valley on daily basis. Pakistan has been describing Wani as a martyr and sending off letter to various international fora inviting them to take notice of human rights violations in Kashmir. India has been blaming Pakistan for fomenting the troubles from across the border, which is disputed by many observers on Kashmir. Amidst the imbroglio, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, threw a diplomatic gambit from the Red Fort in his Independence Day speech by transforming the entire erstwhile narratives on Kashmir. Therefore, the Indo-Pakistan relations and Kashmir issue requires to be understood in the light of this gambit and the new narrative. The new narrative is to suspend terrorism from the list of India s discourse on Indo-Pak relations, and Kashmir from that of Pakistan and move beyond the same. Author thus endeavours to critically analyse and enumerate the imperatives for Indian policy makers in terms of what they should do and what they must not do in the light of recent development. Kashmir and especially the Ghulam Kashmir 1 continue to be an Achilles Heel in India s security matrix both within the region as well as in India s role in global politics. India and Pakistan have fought wars since their independence: India for defending Kashmir from falling into the hands of Pakistan; and Pakistan for occupying whole of Kashmir Valley from India. It has led to only bloodshed with no probable solution ever in the offing. It has further given rise to complexity with each successive war and change of political regime on the either side. Within India when the ruling party happens to be in the opposition always resorts to government-bashing on the pretext of mishandling Kashmir on the one hand, and to free Ghulam Kashmir from the clutches of Pakistan by whatever means possible on the other. Present 36 World Focus July 2017 Ghulam Kashmir: India s Diplomatic Gambit Imperatives for an Action-Oriented Policy Intervention Dr. Alok Kumar Gupta political leadership too was involved into the same kind of political rhetoric when it was there in the opposition benches inside Indian parliament. The ones which are now in the opposition benches are quite vocal and critical of the government handling or mishandling of the issue without proposing any viable solution for the same. Accordingly, both Kashmir and Pak occupied Kashmir (PoK) continue to be used as a tennis ball in the political power game of the treasury and opposition benches inside the Indian parliament. Neither side seem to be serious about solution or attempting for a solution of the protracted problem. Consequently, soldiers are being killed on a regular basis on the one hand; and innocent civilians are under constant threat to their life on account of Pakistan sponsored terrorism as well as on account of military interventions by Indian forces on the other. Civilians and terrorists both have been losing their lives: civilians for no fault of their own; and terrorists being misguided by the vested interests with the hope that they will be able to wean away freedom or liberation of Kashmir from India with their sustained violence and so-called struggle for independence. Life in the valley as well as in the PoK stands jeopardised and with each successive action by the governments on either side, the suffering of the innocent people maximizes without any signs of its mitigation, peace and tranquillity. Therefore, it makes it imperative that both the government converge or do something about it on account of humanitarian concerns. It is the life of innocent civilians that is at stake more than the prestige of the nation-states that are involved in the quagmire of Kashmir and PoK imbroglio. It is high time that political leaders on both sides of the fence must become sensitive to the plight of Kashmiri and stop playing politics. It is in this backdrop that author intents to explore as to what has gone wrong over the years and how it could be resolved to the best of the abilities on either side of the fence. Author also delineates as to what Indian policy makers must-do and must-not-do so far a resolution of the issue is concerned.

37 Present Status and the New Narrative: It is quite obvious that Pakistan has been quite successful in its endeavour to keep the Kashmir issue not only alive but also internationalizing the same against the wishes of India. Kashmir has been there on the political agenda of Pakistan and the same has been sustained over the last seven decades. On the other hand India has been mostly defensive and sporadic in its claim over the PoK. However, much has changed since PoK went into the hands of Pakistan. Accordingly, India needs to understand the changing circumstances and geo-politics of the region and evolve a PoK-policy to be pro-active about the impending problem. Under the existing circumstances India cannot afford to ignore the developments taking place in PoK or around it; especially in view of the fact of Chinese growing presence in the region. Given this backdrop present government of India has presented a bold move towards a new thinking on the entire problem. It was in August 2016 that Prime Minister Narendra Modi, while addressing an all-party meeting on the turmoil in the Kashmir Valley, opened a new line of attack on Pakistan. He said India needs to talk about all parts of Jammu and Kashmir Jammu, Ladakh, the Valley, and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). He then elaborated on the same during his speech from the Red Fort on India s Independence Day and said that as PoK was not merely sliver of land along the Jhelum west of Jammu and Kashmir, as Pakistan perceived it, but the entire erstwhile portion of the Dogra kingdom to the north, now called Gilgit-Baltistan (GB). 2 India has been reluctant so far to voice this claim openly, perhaps hoping that Pakistan would take Indian acquiescence of their occupation as a trade-off for India retaining the Valley. Modi also instructed the Ministry of External Affairs to contact people from PoK living abroad to register their angst. He also referred to the turmoil that Balochistan is facing over last so many years and how the people from Balochistan are requesting him to help them in their struggle against Pakistan and to redress their grievances. He thus made a bold attempt by changing the entire narrative on Kashmir Valley issue by pre-empting Pakistan s claims. This move and assertion has been analysed as a new diplomatic gambit by Modi in national and international media. There is hardly any doubt that India needed to evolve a counter-strategy to Pakistan s sinister design and have a set of policies that could be sustained matching that of Pakistan s. So far Indian political leaders have been only snubbing Pakistan for sponsoring terrorism and issuing occasional statements for the consumption of domestic population that Pakistan must vacate the portion of Kashmir that remains under its illegal occupation. Pakistan s narrative on Kashmir must have a counter-narrative in India. The discourse on Kashmir requires to be shifted now in the larger interests of the Kashmiris. Geo-politics of the South Asia, South East Asia, South China Sea and Asia in general has been changing with the changing world order. Therefore, in the light of structural changes that the world order and the regional geo-politics are faced with, India must redesign its policy options for PoK and Kashmir. India in the present context needs to present a personality of both a dove as well as a hawk to the regional and world community. The government of India must revisit the complex issue of Kashmir, PoK and Gligit-Baltistan in a holistic manner. This could be made possible through a thorough analysis of past mistakes, and policy options in the contemporary circumstances. Such an exercise will help towards evolving innovative and bold measures towards resolving the protracted problem. Given the context following counter-strategy may serve as a guideline for policy-makers. PoK now is on the forefront of China s Geopolitical Calculations: India must develop an Upright Posture There is change in the power play in Kashmir that has brought PoK to the forefront of China s geopolitical calculations. The region came under spotlight after Xi Jinping announced plans for developing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and pledged USD 46 billion for building transport and energy connectivity to link Pakistan with China s ambitious flagship project One Belt One Road (OBOR). 3 The August 2015 Karamay Declaration detailed Pakistan s role in China s global scheme. Russia too has indicated its interest in joining the bandwagon to prop up Pakistan s strategic significance for Eurasian integration. 4 PoK and GB is an area witnessing enhanced Chinese presence and with proposed route for the CPEC, thus assuming great significance. Therefore, raising the issue of PoK and GB by Modi is eminently justified as both are subjects of UN Security Council resolutions, bilateral Ghulam Kashmir: India s Diplomatic Gambit Imperatives for an Action-Oriented Policy Intervention 37

38 agreements and an Indian parliamentary resolution. As per Article 3 of 1963 Sino-Pakistan border agreement, it is accepted that the status of land ceded by Pakistan, including the Shaksgam Valley and its surrounding areas, will be finally determined after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan by negotiations between China and the sovereign authority concerned. The exception is that if Pakistan gets sovereignty, the agreement stands as negotiated. Thus both countries accepted that India could well be the post-settlement sovereign authority. 5 This makes it quite obvious that India has been remiss for years whereas China has incrementally enhanced its presence in the entire region. India thus designed a policy option for itself that it will not allow the actions of China over CPEC to go uncontested and that it must have a voice in CPEC. It was indeed a right move on part of India and well asserted; yet it requires to be matched by actions on the ground. Any geo-economic project that has an impact on the economies of the region will affect the politics of the region as well including the balance of power. India s inactions over last so many years have also bolstered the morale of both China and Pakistan. China and Pakistan was reported to have carried out joint patrol along the China-Pakistan border. Interestingly the area of the patrol, identified in the report as the China-Pakistan border, is the frontier region of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir an area claimed by India as an integral part of its territory. 6 Therefore, within these changing dynamics, it becomes important to analyse as to where exactly Kashmir fits into the larger China-Pakistan, and India- China dynamics. Fact remains that if China wishes success for CPEC it will have to find diplomatic ways to resolve Indo-Pak conflicts and take both India and Pakistan into confidence rather trying to divide its two immediate neighbours to further its interest. According to some experts economics drives the politics, but it is also true that politics at times sabotage economics. India has the only available policy option of maintaining a strong and upright stand on CPEC and PoK. India must enhance its Assertiveness: India has already been facing a number of incidents like Pathankot attack on Indian Army base camp; attack on Army camp in Uri in September 2016; 7 frequent violations of Line of Control (LoC) by resorting to bombing and firing; are to name but a few. In line of such development, India needs to be more assertive on PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan. In fact, assertiveness on this issue should have been Indian policy as soon as it became clear that UN Security Council resolutions 8 on Jammu and Kashmir could not be implemented because of Pakistan s intransigence in taking the mandated first steps. 9 Under the Simla agreement, signed in July 1972, India and Pakistan agreed to resolve all outstanding issues bilaterally. Finally, the 1994 Indian parliamentary resolution reiterated the legal position that the entire territory of the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India and asked Pakistan to vacate the area under its illegal occupation. This need to be reiterated in no uncertain terms. India must expose Mishandling of PoK by Pakistan: Pakistan has not been able to manage the governance of PoK in the larger interest and development of inhabitants of the region. Therefore, discontentment is writ large over the entire territory with frequent eruptions of protests by local population. Pakistan has changed the demographic pattern of the region by bringing in outsiders to settle there. Pakistan has also imposed a constitution which totally ignored the legitimate aspirations of the local population. Accordingly, even though Pakistan has named it as Azad Kashmir; the fact is that it still exists as Ghulam Kashmir as Article 7(2) 10 of the AJK Constitution envisages its total subjugation to Pakistan with anyone not agreeing to this becoming ineligible to contest elections. Therefore, it is an opportune moment for India that India should adopt an aggressive policy towards PoK to pre-empt erstwhile contributions of Pakistan in the unmaking of PoK and also Pakistan s sinister design on rest of the valley. India s pressure on Pakistan in PoK, including Gilgit- Baltistan may force Pakistan to mend its ways in Indian Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan s duplicity in PoK must be exposed: There is no denying the fact that after successfully asserting its complete control over PoK, Pakistan started instigating, aiding, and abetting disturbance, 38 World Focus July 2017

39 turmoil and violence in the Valley which continues to pursue unabated till date. Therefore, India seriously needs to make out-of-the-box thinking to teach a befitting lesson to Pakistan so that it is forced to mend its ways. The decision of present political leadership in India to be more pro-active in PoK has come to be an excellent strategy. We are taught from childhood that attack is the best defence. Therefore, in line of this thinking rather than being defensive in Jammu and Kashmir, India need to raise its offensive in myriad of ways to put tremendous pressure on Pakistan. This shall also help India to pre-empt its own pressure which most of the political governments have been facing since independence. India now needs to go all out on this. Indian leaders and diplomats should establish contact with leaders from the different regions of PoK, including Gilgit-Baltistan, who are living in exile because of Pakistan s policies. India must highlight the rights violations in the region, expose Pakistan s duplicity vis-à-vis POK, and extend moral support to the local population in their fight against Pakistani occupation. Armed Support to PoK Liberation: People of PoK are reeling under the Pakistani regime and are being treated worse than second class citizens. They need to be liberated from the clutches of Pakistani leadership as well as Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan who are using them just to serve their own vested interests and for political vendetta. Most political philosophers have argued on the lines of Kautilya s recommendations that a government must resort to sam, dam, dand, bhed (persuasion, temptation, punishment, and division) as various, different sequential means to achieve an end. India may resort to any of these means that are sequenced pragmatically to achieve its goal of foreign policy in the interest of the people of PoK as well as in the interests of its own people of Jammu and Kashmir and other parts of India, who quite often become victim of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. India therefore may also think of an armed support to the disgruntled elements inside PoK, and provide other logistical help to those motivated people who are prepared to wage a sustained war against the Pakistani occupation of their territory. It is well in response to the way Pakistan is supporting terrorist activities akin to waging guerrilla warfare against the Indian government and people; for no fault of India. India may gear-up its external intelligence division to further its interests in this endeavour. India has both the might and the means; that too much superior to Pakistan. It is only the political will that is needed. Indian policy-makers and diplomats need to learn that if China could become a major power of great might following the tenets of philosophical father Sun Tzu; why can t we also enhance our status and might following the tenets of our own philosopher Kautilya, which has already proved its utility and pragmatism. Dialogue with Pakistan: It has been reiterated every now and then by Pakistan that Kashmir is a dispute which require a political solution through diplomatic means and not through military means, as history is a witness to the fact that military clashes have only led to blood-shed. On the same line, India need to project that PoK is such a dispute that requires political solution through diplomatic means and keep harping on the same string before the leaders of the world and people. The way in Simla Agreement, the two countries have resolved to settle all outstanding issues bilaterally; it provides leverage to India that in the spirit of Simla Agreement, the issue of PoK must be settled through dialogue and bilaterally. On the other hand, India must also think of internationalizing the issues related to liberation of PoK and its natural assimilation with the rest of the Valley. There is no denying the fact that this is certainly an issue over which the two countries need to talk. India s long inertia vis-à-vis PoK has led to the creation of a negative mind-set among a large section of Indians who feel that any dialogue on Kashmir with Pakistan means talking only about the Valley of Kashmir, which is with India. 11 Modi s government has revealed some inkling of such a policy approach towards PoK. Therefore, his stand on PoK including Gilgit-Baltistan and Balochistan will go a long way in changing the widely prevalent negative mind-set within Indian population and policy-makers. Accordingly, in any dialogue with Pakistan, India must insist that PoK should be at the top of the agenda, along with terrorism, and pressurise Pakistan to vacate the areas under its illegal occupation and liberate the people of PoK. India must internationalise the PoK Issue: India seems to have been suffering from a misperception that raising the issue of PoK on the Ghulam Kashmir: India s Diplomatic Gambit Imperatives for an Action-Oriented Policy Intervention 39

40 international and multilateral forum would be wrong and it may tarnish the international personality of India. Owing to this misperception India so far has been reluctant to raise the issue of PoK on any international and multilateral forum, which has already taken a huge toll on India. It has caused severe damage to Indian policy approach to the conflict over seventy years of its existence. Time now is to remove this misperception and change the strategy. India should not only explain its stand on Kashmir and expose Pakistan s duplicity in bilateral discussion with friendly countries, but must also raise it at international and multilateral forums to drive its point home in a deft manner. A kind of diplomatic blitz requires to be organised that too in an extremely aggressive manner to internationalise the issue of PoK and Gilgit- Baltistan, that it is a long pending disputed territory which stands illegally occupied by Pakistan. Need for Course Correction within India: Situations within the Kashmir valley on the Indian side has been shuttling from normal, to improved, to tumultuous, and some time grossly disturbed on account of massive violence. Presently the situation inside the Kashmir Valley is quite grim. Indian political leadership has mostly adopted peaceful means to diffuse the crisis whenever it erupts, even though Indian Army remains deployed within the Valley among civilians. There must not be any doubt among the Indian policy makers that, diffusing the crisis in the Valley whenever it erupts must be on the top priority of the government. Every time India improves the situations to normal or near normal within the Valley, it leaves many scars on the lives of the local people as they are the ones who suffer on account of loss of the lives of their near and dear ones on the one hand, and disruption of their life on account of loss of their property on the other. It is nearly impossible to heal their wound. Such people also become vulnerable and an easy prey for subversive elements; that indoctrinate them against the Indian government and military, and quite successfully motivate them to create further insurgency and violence. This leads to a vicious cycle of violence and suffering to the local population. Therefore, it becomes crucial for Indian political leadership to deal with such a situation which is not an easy task. Here are certain policy options that the political leadership within India may think of adopting: Firstly, the Indian leadership must devise means and mechanism to deal with separatists within the Valley of both the varieties who are pro-pakistan and pro-independence elements. While dealing with the situation they must not be clubbed together as they have different agendas. The leadership needs to evolve different methods and means to deal with pro-pakistan element on the one hand, and proindependence on the other. It has rightly been pointed out by the Supreme Court of India, though in a different context that loosely levelling any one separatist and terrorist is objectionable and it must not be done. Hence, they must be dealt with differently. Secondly, India should publicise the fact the Pakistan has been a Punjabi-dominated state that remains involved in mistreating ethnic minorities like Bengali Muslims, Balochis, Pashtuns, Sindhis, Muhajirs and also the people of PoK and Gilgit- Baltistan. This will help India marginalise the pro- Pakistani elements both within India as well as elsewhere and will weaken their hold on separatist elements and their tendencies. Any plan of entering into any kind of dialogue with them must be abandoned lock, stock and barrel. Such character of Pakistan must be brought to the notice of the people in Valley and PoK to contain their affections, if any with Pakistan. Thirdly, Indian policy-makers may think of engaging the pro-independence elements among separatists and enhance its connectivity with them. Pakistan has always opposed independence of Kashmiris and any idea of a separate state of Kashmir. Rather, since its inception Pakistan has been vying for a merger of valley with PoK and thus Pakistan, and the same has been reiterated by them time and again. They have been fomenting terrorist activities inside the valley so that creating disturbance and hate against India they can facilitate and necessitate the separation of the Valley with consequent merger of the region with Pakistan. India must highlight this fact of Pakistan s intentions to the outside world including the plight of the communities who are chosen to be with Pakistan. This shall further strengthen India s stand on Kashmir and PoK and will also boost the confidence and morale of Indian Army which stands deployed in different nook and 40 World Focus July 2017

41 corner of the Valley. Pro-independence elements within Kashmir are few and gullible and they could be managed provided India is always pro-active towards engaging them and consuming them within the Indian political mainstream. Fourthly, India must also highlight the fact that Pakistan has fast turned into a safe-haven for radical Islamic elements since its inception. Radical Islam is responsible for jihadi militancy in different parts of the world, of which Western countries are also victim. Radical Islam thus has a global agenda and thus proactive for the same worldwide. The advocates of radical Islam are responsible for financial assistance and supply of arms to Muslims in different parts of the world who according to them are fighting for their rights to replenish their genuine or perceived grievances against their perpetrators which are usually political regimes. Radical elements within Islam take control of small and big movements which has made the people of Kashmir vulnerable. This has also increased the vulnerability of Indian political leadership in particular and Indian polity in general. India need to educate Kashmiri Muslims about this fact of Pakistan s leadership and Islamic radicalism as it threatens their basic culture of Sufism and tolerance. They need to be convinced that the growth of radical Islam as propagated by Wahabis/ Salafis in the Valley would not only change their way of life but could also drag Kashmiri Muslims into wider international conflicts. 12 Such development will neither be in the interests of Islam, nor to that of Muslims. Fifthly, the special provisions within the Constitution of India by way of Article 370 must be abrogated forthwith. The special status that is accorded to the state by virtue of the existence of this Article has lost its relevance and is now there, more as a political necessity than anything else. It may have its own merits and demerits with proper or improper arguments. Yet it requires to be set aside to facilitate complete assimilation of the State within the Indian polity as an integral part of it. Mere shouting from the ramparts that Kashmir is an integral part of India is not sufficient it must be established in words, actions and spirit. Sixthly, Kashmiris are suffering from a kind of trust deficit in Indian leadership and people. Indian policy-makers need to evolve proper analysis of the causes and accordingly devise means to assuage the same. The policy makers must evolve means and organise effective policy interventions to assimilate the people of Kashmir in the national mainstream. Kashmir has been provided with development package by number of governments in the past, yet it is not clear as to where all the money meant for infrastructural development have gone. The Union government need to work in tandem and at close quarters with state government to evolve policies for development in all walks of life. They also need to create opportunities on long-term basis within a very short span of time to engage the Kashmiri youth irrespective of their gender. This may be made possible through development of infrastructure, industries, soft-ware technology parks, other economic developments which are region-specific. Youth from the Valley must also be inducted into security forces at all levels. Such a policy intervention will help towards sucking the unemployed out of the resentful masses who generally become the cannon fodder for the separatist elements to create the imbroglio and organise protest movements and marches on the streets. Seventhly, cultural activities along with games and sports are another instrument through which conflicts could be managed and mitigated. Government and civil society may play a constructive role in this direction. The companies and business houses may look for youths from Kashmir to provide them job on the basis of sports quota and engage them in inter-state games and sports activities. Similarly, cultural activities could also be organised involving people from the Valley. Such engagements shall go a long way towards managing the conflict and contain the disruptive activities. It will also set an example before the people from PoK and they will also aspire for the same. Eighthly, the refugees from PoK living in India and elsewhere must be located and used to air their grievances against the Pakistani dispensation. Their grievances could be promoted on international forums with hard evidences. The endeavour by the Jammu and Kashmir government to have identified 36,348 Ghulam Kashmir: India s Diplomatic Gambit Imperatives for an Action-Oriented Policy Intervention 41

42 families for distribution of the rehabilitation package under which each family will get around Rs.5.5 lakh is a welcome step. In the long run such population could be used as a potent instrument to expose the misdeeds of Pakistan. According to reports the refugees from West Pakistan, mostly from PoK got settled in different areas of Jammu, Kathua and Rajouri districts, even though they cannot be taken as permanent residents of the state in terms of Jammu and Kashmir Constitution. 13 Therefore, the government of India in collaboration with the state government must work out a policy for refugees from PoK and establish a package for their rehabilitation and also use them to expose the plight of the people which shall spell out the misdeeds of Pakistan to the world community. What must-not-be-done by Indian Policy Makers?: Firstly, Balochistan issue is not like Kashmir. India has never contested it nor is India a contiguous state. India could have had a horse in the race had it bought Gwadar from Oman when the possibility arose. It eventually got sold for $3 million to Pakistan in It was again absence of strategic thinking at that stage, as India today would not have been worrying about CPEC had it got a toe-hold on Pakistan s Makran coast. 14 Prime Minister Modi committed a grave mistake by raising the issue of Balochistan from Red Fort on Independence Day. Pakistan was quick to raise fingers on India that it confirms their allegation that India is abetting terror and violence in Balochistan. This may be used by Pakistan as a pretext to support and foment India s internal disturbances like Maoist insurgencies, and other domestic separatist violence. If at all, needed to use it to India s advantage then India could have provided subtle support to Balochistan movement. It could have been an excellent strategy to defeat Pakistan on its own turf. It could have also helped India in its endeavour to sabotage the CPEC project of China which is passing through Balochistan majorly. Such a move by Modi is bound to create further mess and hence must be avoided at all cost. Sooner the corrective steps are adopted it would be better for India. Secondly, Indian government need to focus on the trans-loc parts of Kashmir controlled by Pakistan and at the same time need to contain the cross-border firing and shelling as it causes hardships to the life of people residing in border villages. However, India must not resort to populist nationalism by blowing-up its actions across border. India claimed to have conducted a surgical strike in PoK in September 2016 across the Line of Control, which was subsequently denied by Pakistan. 15 They way surgical strike was thrown to the people through the electronic media and social networking channels were simply unwarranted and policy blunders. India no doubt must resort to such strikes inside Pakistan to give back Pakistan in its own language of bullets; yet keep denying any such happening to national and international media and project a stand befitting to a peace-loving nation-state. However, just opposite to such a policy Indian Army under the present political leadership tried to exaggerate its actions to the populist media simply to please the common people and blew it out of proportion for the consumption of people. All this was done to achieve political mileage out of it, which by all standards is an anti-national approach. Therefore, political leaders belonging to any political party in India must not resort to such cheap populist nationalism and use sensitive national interests to further their political ends. Thirdly, the effervescence within the Indian Territory like the one that took place in Jawaharlal Nehru University, where a group of misguided students resorted to slogan-shouting for independence of Kashmir requires to be handled with utmost maturity. Such matters must be left to the intelligence wing and should be nipped at the bud stage without resorting to its castigation as a national shame. Moreover, youths belonging to any part of India must not be captivated and tried as anti-national by branding them as traitors working against the unity and integrity of India. May be they are doing it under the indoctrination and motivations of some external forces. Such youths must be captivated to reach deeply into their psyche and locate the root cause of the problem to mitigate the same in a holistic manner. However, the way the entire episode was handled everything got politicised and a long-drawn debate ensued on Nationalism throughout the country which was meaningless and the nation got deviated from the real issue. Rather such episodes should be used to further the interest of the intelligence which is 42 World Focus July 2017

43 working to decipher the real cause and root of the external interventions. India must not resort to blowingup such instances and issues by shaming it and politicising it; rather must use it in the national interests to mitigate the real cause of it. Fourthly, a group of experts on Kashmir affair have been suggesting the withdrawal of Army deployment in the Valley as it has been counterproductive on account of it being deployed over a longer period of time. Another group of people have been suggesting that Army deployment should be in short spurts and that too in selected areas on a need-to-use basis and should be withdrawn as soon as the situation stabilises. 16 Yet a third group are of the opinion that instead of the continued imposition of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, its lifting and imposition should be on need basis and confined to areas actually affected by militant violence. There is no doubt that there are number of pitfalls of deployment of Army for a fairly long period of time in any civilian areas. Army also develops fatigue in a situation of protracted conflict and thus resorts to certain actions which are unwarranted and are subject of criticism. Army may also lose its relevance in the eyes of the community within an area of conflict and would thus affect their effectiveness in terms of deterrence, which would lessen. However, in a kind of situation that is prevailing in Kashmir where a lowintensity military conflict or a proxy-war by Pakistan is being waged on a sustained basis, makes it imperative to deploy Indian Army on a long-term basis as it would be next to impossible to contain the conflict by state police or internal para-military dispensation. Indian policy makers thus must not oblige such experts who have been advocating withdrawal of Army from the Valley. It is the deployment of Indian Army that has strengthened the Indian hold on the ground otherwise Pakistan could have made the situations worse inside the Valley, as it has no regards for humanity and human rights. The tribalism that exists in Pakistan s psyche would have engulfed the people of Kashmir, which they have been failing to understand thus far. Syria and Iraq is a must-learn lesson for those who are thinking of a long-sustained struggle for either independence or separation of the Valley. Fifthly, the long adopted posture of strategic restraint amidst dreaded of the terrorist attacks by Pak-sponsored terrorist organizations, requires not only a psychological shift; but a meaningful shift the results of which are visible on the ground rather than merely in the published documents of Indian government. Mere continuation of the destabilizing exchanges on the border will strain the ever-morefragile ceasefire rather than leading to a logical resolution of any of the disputes between the two nations. Therefore, present or future governments of India must not try to fool itself or the nation by publishing that the rate of crimes, terrorist-activities, and skirmishes between civilians and army is on the decline because of surgical strike. Kashmir warrants that governments at least in this case need to be extra sensitive and must work on the ground more than it seem to have been working. Let silence be more articulate than speech and writing in case of Kashmir. Conclusion: Erstwhile political leadership has been strongly condemning the encouragement and support which terrorists and their activities have been receiving from the State of Pakistan. Almost every Prime Minister and External Affairs Ministers of India warned Pakistan not to incite; support and sponsor violence and terrorism in any part of the Valley and refrain from deplorable meddling in India s internal affairs, but in vain. Words and warning carry no meaning and makes Indian policy makers a butt of Pakistani rulers. Moreover, increasing instances of Sino-Pak nexus has further complicated the entire gamut of relationship between India and Pakistan. Other major powers of the world have been issuing statements in accordance with their requirement of national interests and prevailing circumstances, but have not done anything substantial to resolve the crisis. Indo-Pak relationship is continuously on the wane and this has made the life of people both in the Valley and PoK increasingly worse. Under such circumstances the present government of India has threw a new diplomatic gambit in so many ways; the results of which are still not yet visible. Raising issues such as a comprehensive talk on liberation of PoK, GB and violations of human rights in Balochistan, India has thrown a diplomatic gambit. The later course of relations between India Ghulam Kashmir: India s Diplomatic Gambit Imperatives for an Action-Oriented Policy Intervention 43

44 and Pakistan has led to a stalemate; which India must not bother about. A comprehensive dialogue with Pakistan must include preconditions such as: cessation of cross-border terrorism by Pakistan aimed at Jammu and Kashmir; complete end of incitement to violence and terrorism from across the border in Pakistan; detention and prosecution of internationally recognised terrorist leaders residing on Pakistani soil and are active towards fomenting trouble inside India in Jammu and Kashmir; complete closure of terrorist camps inside Pakistan; and handing over of those terrorists who have taken shelter inside Pakistan after committing crime on Indian soil. This has already been pointed out to Pakistan by India s Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar. This is the first thing that India must impress upon Pakistani interlocutors in clear terms. Secondly, the dialogue with Pakistan must start from setting a timeline for withdrawal of Pakistan from PoK region. Fact remains that PoK is under an illegal occupation of Pakistan and the people in the region are still not assimilated into the national mainstream of Pakistan; rather are being mistreated and are victim of discrimination and exploitation. Illegal occupation of PoK must be put on top of the agenda on any Indo-Pak dialogue in future. Thirdly, India rightly rejected the UNHCR proposal for a visit to Kashmir Valley. Such international organizations should first visit PoK and appraise Indian leadership about the violations of Human Rights being orchestrated by Pakistan through illegal occupation. Undoubtedly, Pakistan is the biggest criminal of violation of human rights on its own soil by virtue of becoming a manufacturing industry of terrorists. Pakistan itself is also suffering on account of its own home-grown terrorism. Yet it is failing to learn any lesson out of it. Under given circumstance India needs to be cautiously and strongly pro-active and gradually evolve a PoK and G-B policy as discussed above. 44 World Focus July 2017 Footnotes 1 It is addressed by India a Pak Occupied Kashmir (POK) and as Azad Kashmir by Pakistan. PoK is also known as Azad Jammu and Kashmir, AJK or Azad Kashmir, is an illegally occupied selfgoverning administrative division of Pakistan. The territory lies west of the Indian-administered state of Jammu and Kashmir, and was previously part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, which ceased to exist as a result of the first Kashmir war fought between India and Pakistan. The territory shares a border with Gilgit-Baltistan, together with which it is referred to by the United Nations and other International organizations as Pakistanadministered Kashmir. Ghulam Kashmir has a total area of 13,297 square kilometres (5,134 sq. mi), with an estimated population of around 4.6 million people. topic/pakistan-occupied-kashmir 2 K C Singh, How Legitimate Were Modi s Recent Reference to Balochistan?, August 17, 2017, The Wire, kashmir-way-forward/ 3 Saba Muzaffer Nazki, Kashmir s Reckoning With the Implications of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, The Diplomat, March 12, 2017, According to the author, the CPEC is an ambitious economic project between Pakistan and China that includes motorways, dams, hydropower projects, railways and pipelines. It connects Pakistan s deep-see Gwadar Port with the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in northwest China. The project is part of China s larger initiative, the OBOR, which is aimed at helping regional economic integration. 4 P. Stobdan, The Need for Haste on Pakistan-occupied Kashmir: China Pakistan Economic Corridor Needs a Counter Strategy October 07, 2015, IDSA Policy Brief. 5 Ibid., no.2. 6 Prakhar Gupta, Pakistan-China Hold Joint Border Patrols Near Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir The Diplomat, July 23, 2016, 7 Ankit Panda, Indian Army Fire Assault Hits Pakistan Military Outposts, The Diplomat, October 31, 2016, 19 soldiers lost their life in the attack on Uri outposts. 8 The UNSC Resolution number 47of 1948 envisaged three sequential and conditional steps i.e. withdrawal of all Pakistani regular and irregular troops from the region to the satisfaction of the UN; thereafter, a reduction in the number of Indian troops to the minimum necessary for the maintenance of law and order; and then, a plebiscite under UN supervision. The resolution became irrelevant after Pakistan refused to take the first step which was mandatory for its implementation. 9 Sanjeev Tripathi, India s Assertiveness on Pakistani Occupied Kashmir is Breath of Fresh Air, The Wire, September 9, It reads, No person or political party in Azad Jammu and Kashmir shall be permitted to propagate against, or take part in activities prejudicial or detrimental to, the ideology of the State s accession to Pakistan. 11 Ibid., no Ibid., no PTI, Rs.2000 crore to be Given by Government to Refugees from PoK, August 28, 2016, 14 Ibid., no Shawn Snow, Is India Capable of a Surgical Strike in Pakistan Controlled Kashmir? The Diplomat, September 30, 2016, This author claims that according to Pakistani military the notion of surgical strike linked to alleged terrorists bases is an illusion being deliberately generated by India to create false effects. It further claims that Surgical strikes can be conducted through airborne or artillery based precision guided strikes or ground force based assaults; both of which require sophisticated intelligence collection, platforms to conduct collections, and surveillance of target sites and objectives. India is still on the cusp of building a sophisticated and modernized asymmetrical capability to conduct counter-terror operations, while much of its forces are still organized and trained on Cold War models. 16 Ibid., no.9.

45 Prognosis of Kashmir Crisis: Hobsonean Choice? Dr. Gouri Sankar Nag and Dr. Sajal Basu Kashmir crisis has undergone a dramatic change during the last two decades. The meaning of azadi has changed considerably taking the form of religion. The different factions in Kashmir s separatist movement have lost their hold in the wake of aggressive jihadi groups. The intrusion of stone pelters and martyrdom of Kashmir terrorists have roused the emotion of the masses of Kashmir. This paper is designed to show the difficulties that Indian government is having to respond to the duality of context; on one hand, it has to counter and negotiate with sections of Kashmiri society and on the other hand, the nefarious presence of Pakistan and moreover, radical Islamic connect now a day is building up to transform the entire scenario, thus making the presence of army almost indispensable. This predicament on the Indian side becomes all the more pronounced if we look at the other side the ties between Pakistan and Azad (Free) Kashmir, the relative calm there, meaning thereby the marked absence of violence in the internal politics of Kashmir lying under control of Pakistan. Does it mean failure of the India s Kashmir policy compared to Pakistan s handling of relations with Azad Kashmir? We do not feel so, for we have to see interplay of many factors, and how the situation has altered over time. Though we have offered a few suggestions breakthrough, yet we feel that any scheme for dialogue or interference for conflict resolution remains far-fetched. The sober good boy image of Manchester suicide bomber Salman Abedy or huge posthumous popularity of Burhan Wani who has become the symbol of Kashmir resistance movement, do not explain why such introspective boys get transformed into narcissist killers in the theatre of terrorist exhibitionism. Recently, the Maoist terrorists of dozen subtitled Naxalite groups have celebrated 50 th anniversary of Naxal movement at rural backwater of Naxalbari, otherwise a distant neglected hamlet near Darjeeling-Nepal border. It shows as if the Indian state is under siege. Organized elitist violence and ideological terrorism have its own way of dragging the community back to primordial rule of atavism. The first author belonging to a generation of state sponsored terrorism undertaken by ruling party goons and police could feel the memory-load of turbulent days in 2000s marked by Singur, Nandigram and other popular movements symbolizing the fight against dispossession of land thrown upon by the collusion of the then LF government in West Bengal and corporate capital. Second author of this paper bear reminiscences of turbulent years of radical so-called revolutionary violence stalking over the state of West Bengal in , and However, it is not specific state-centric phenomenon of repression, though looking back to history, we can say if militaristic approach of sober-rattling in dealing with brewing political unrest was doctrinally developed anywhere, it was Kashmir. Technically, central security forces viz. CRPF and the army are supposed to work in aid of the police and civil administration in dealing with law and order situations in the state. Yet, often these forces compete with each other for achieving nationalistic objectives with the blessings of authorities in New Delhi. Even the situation has aggravated to such an extent that army has turned down state government s plea for the removal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and this is happening in spite of the fact that the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir heads the Unified Command composed of the state police, the CRPF, army and other central forces which are deployed in the state. In this atmosphere of increasing and intensified militarized control, the people of the valley have witnessed how the local police have gradually turned as brutal ( zaalim ) as the army. As a result when people feel there is no public institution to register their grievances and when Kashmiri youth in an Prognosis of Kashmir Crisis: Hobsonean Choice? 45

46 average are stereotyped as terrorists, instead of being treated with dignity, a severe/serious trust deficit must be there to add to the continuing morass and psyche of the people, who start putting the question what the state represents. Granted, but to be candid can we say also that the Indian radicals, liberal intellectuals behave like one-eyed deer, whether be it Maoist operation or Kashmir militancy. Mr. V. Suresh, General Secretary of PUCL, after a spot visit to Kashmir, in a meeting at Kolkata on 25 th February, 2017 expressed dismay and concern over government s disinterest in negotiated settlement. He held that Burhan Wani s martyrdom triggered off militancy to assume a massive populist dimension. Kuldeep Nayar, veteran commentator and close observer of Kashmir movement, has likewise specified aberrations of India government such as misuse of Article 370, nonopening of Indian market to the Kashmiris, lack of skill development measures etc.(source: Dainik Sanbad, Agartala dated 17 th May, 2017). Similarly, there are scholars and human right activists like Nighat Shafi Pandit who feels that driven by a predominantly security-based policy, the State has failed to recognize the deep anguish of the people and to put forth an executable socially-oriented agenda. As she points out there is no time-bound programme for the rehabilitation of families affected by turmoil or as her portrayal of the predicaments in the Valley during the long spells of curfew in the summer of 2010 lays bare what she had perceived and experienced: hardly any empathy was shown by the authorities for ensuring uninterrupted supply of essential commodities, especially medicines, milk and baby food. Even doctors, who were in possession of valid curfew passes, were not allowed to report at their hospitals for duty... (See Shafi s article Wounds and Balms in the anthology entitled A Tangled Web Jammu and Kashmir, 2011, Harper Collins). In this State versus society tussle, the routine allegation of military excess and alienation of Kashmiri youth are symptomatic of the mutual blame game. But all these seem to sidetrack Indian army s fantastic service to the inundated Kashmiri people two years back. This paper is therefore designed to show the difficulties that Indian government is having to respond to the duality of context; on one hand, you have to counter and negotiate with sections of Kashmiri society and on the other hand, the nefarious presence of Pakistan and moreover, radical Islamic connect now a day is building up to transform the entire scenario, thus making the presence of army almost indispensable. This predicament on the Indian side becomes all the more pronounced if we look at the other side the ties between Pakistan and Azad (Free) Kashmir 1 (the area under Pakistani influence), the relative calm there, meaning thereby the marked absence of violence in the internal politics of Kashmir lying under control of Pakistan. Does it mean failure of the India s Kashmir policy, 2 ( See Indian Defense Review post on 2/6/17) compared to Pakistan s handling of relations with Azad Kashmir? We do not feel so, for we have to see interplay of many factors, and how the situation has altered over time.the illegitimacy of 7.5 lakh troops in a land of 7 million populations, allegation of torture and sodomisation of students by the Indian military may sound reasonable. But what about the human rights of Indian soldiers who are kidnapped, beheaded, killed and often stonepelted? What about the Kashmiri Pundits who are driven away from their land? Distance and isolation, two major geographical factors are likely to influence the Indian mind which considers Kashmir to be a distant chronic Indo-Pak dispute, or one of the outstanding issues fuelling the dispute fanned by foreign powers. The latest issue of One Belt One Road (OBOR) running through Pakistan controlled Azad Kashmir will hardly be considered an imperialistic design by the radicals in India since China is there. The liberals and radicals do not bother how the Kashmir separatist movement has changed its mask from Insaniyat to Azadi to now Islamic Jihad. But this shift has not occurred in a straightaway manner. Perhaps having lost hope after the humiliating defeat in the 1971 India-Pakistan war that Pakistani state was no longer able to fend for independent Kashmir there started a switch over in one important respect. That is to say, to counteract these negative Kashmiri perceptions out to turn towards more cogent alternative, Islamabad started to tighten its control over portions of Azad Kashmir. First it put Gilgit and then Pakistan-administered Baltistan under its direct control. The incorporation of Hunza in 1974 further undermined hopes of a special relationship spawned by the Kashmir 46 World Focus July 2017

47 Government Act promulgated the same year ( See Riffat Hussain s article Pakistan s Relations with Azad Kashmir and the Impact on Indo-Pakistani Relations in Rafiq Dossani and Henry S. Rowen edited Peace in South Asia, 2005, Orient BlackSwan). Also to be noted here that a part of old Jammu and Kashmir known as Aksai Chin was ceded by Pakistan to China in 1962 on the basis of a negotiated settlement between the two states. So, the talk of Pakistan maintaining special relationship vis-à-vis Aazad Jammu and Kashmir (hereafter AJK) is nothing but cosmetic platitude, while the reality reveals the process of continuous political integration of the areas of AJK into Pakistan. As Syed Rifaat Hussain of the department of Defense and Strategic Studies at Quaid-i-Azam University of Islamabad discusses the process that could be traced back to late 1960s when mainstream parties of Pakistan like Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto s Pakistan People s Party set up its branch in Muzaffarabad in October 1967 and in the guise of introducing electoral politics in AJK, Islamabad sought to co-opt the rising tide of Kashmiri nationalism. But while this did not lead to a complete harmony of views General Zia ul Haq resorted to another ploy. In April 1982 he nominated a three members Federal Majlis-e-Shura from the Northern Areas of AJK and publicly declared, Kashmir has been a disputed issue, but so far as the Northern Areas are concerned, we do not accept them as disputed (Quoted from Rifaat Hussain s article). This wellcalculated stratagem enabled him to represent the northern regions of Gilgit, Hunza and Skardu as integral part of Pakistan. Not only that, Ignoring Muzaffarabad s assertions, Islamabad announced a reform package for the Northern Areas in April 1994, the implementation of which turned this contested territory into a de facto fifth province of Pakistan. (Rifaat Hussain, ibid, p-120). So, what we intend to suggest is the need for a balanced view without which we might mistakenly think that everything is going well in AJK while the reality is diametrically opposite, i.e. blatant violation of the sovereignty of AJK plus Islamabad s mischievous design to truncate the size of the disputed territory and appropriating the portions of it thereby. Now coming back to what is happening on the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir, we see quite a different sheds of thought: Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a well-known Kashmiri separatist Hurriyat leader favours dialogue on conditions that India first accept Kashmir s disputed status. On the other hand, hailing from the influential family of Mirwaiz Maulavi Farooq, the leader of the Awami Action Committee, his son Umar Farooq, playing the role of spiritual leader of Kashmiri Muslims, stands for peaceful negotiation for the fulfillment the aspiration of the people of Kashmir. Yet another line of thought has been advocated by Yasin Malik. Belonging to Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front, which originally spearheaded armed militancy in the valley, Malik firmly believes in independent Kashmir. By now, however, all of them have been marginalized by leaderless groups and splinter factions of youth terrorists who have no institutional arrangement with which to initiate talks. On the top of it, concerns keep on multiplying from the fact that they are receiving foreign funds. This ominous nexus has been reinforced time and again by the inputs gathered by Indian intelligence from interrogation of captured terrorists. As Rana Banerji mentions in his article on al Qaeda, Lashker-e-Taiba and Indian Terrorism in India s National Security, According to Banerji, finance comes through hawala from UAE, Saudi Arabia and also via ISI funding mode. An interesting revelation from Banerji s article is the point of rift in the organizations of hitherto pro-kashmir terrorists based in Pakistan. As he avers from Headley s claim that in spite of efforts by Pakistan s ISI to contain this rift, many committed fighters from several splinter groups were influenced to leave Kashmir centric outfits and to join Taliban and many others reportedly opted to join up with recruits volunteering to fight with Islamic State in Iraq (Banerji s article in Satish Kumar edited India s National Security, Routledge, 2014, p362). 3 Does it mean less militancy in Indian Kashmir or the prospect of our inching towards a peaceful settlement is going to brighten up? Till date the answer remains suspended as anxiety has taken heightened form with new angularities emerging from the fast changing global setting. We have to appreciate at the generalized level that militant terrorism in every region and pocket has its own way to lead to reign of organized terror by the state or socio-economic hegemony of corporate interest, which are but two sides of the same coin. At this the usual victim has Prognosis of Kashmir Crisis: Hobsonean Choice? 47

48 been democracy. In the terrorist affected areas where almost invariably counter-terrorism of state held sway, the political space is preoccupied by rightist forces. This has been evidenced in Chattisgarh, Dantewada, and also Bastar. Kashmir terrorism seems to follow the same route. Distance and isolation tend to create some sort of anomie in the national mind. Terrorist killings, counter-killings become one type of exhibit or spectacle as found during war and famine. Very few people of India would object to negotiation and constructive dialogue. But with whom? As French scholar Professor Olivier Roy puts it, It is a cult of death, association of terrorism and jihadism with the pursuit of death. The fascination of death and brutal mass killing are found among the youth who join ISIS (Olivier Roy, Jihad and Death: Global Appeal of Islamic State, Hurst, 2017). The definition of Kashmir struggle has been changed. In the din raised by the separatist propaganda, truth never matters. The two women drowned accidentally may well be misconstrued as case of rape-murder by Indian military ( Rahul Pandita s article Who Lost Kashmir, Open magazine, 1 May, 2017). Hoisting of Pakistani flag has now been replaced by hoisting ISIS flag at different conflict prone areas of the valley since Kashmir separatism now seeks rule of Allah. The insurgency is a fight for the implementation of Islam. The struggle is about Shariat and Sahadat (i.e. martyrdom) and Pakistani flag does not fall within the pure realm of Shariat...because the Kalma has not been inscribed on it. The Kalmah is the Islamic testimony of Allah s oneness and Mohammed s prophethood ( Naseer Geelani s article Azadi means many things, Open magazine, May 29, 2017). Initially, the demand was to hold Referendum as per UN resolution. But the condition that before Referendum the Pakistan occupied territory to be vacated was never considered. Then there was pro- Pakistani stance and camp-followers of independent from India and Pakistan mould flowing inside the movement. The latest trend, however, is drifting towards precarious free for all situation. The ideological fault-lines and paradoxes overlap with All Parties Hurriyat Conference, Muslim United Front, JKLF, Peoples Conference, Hizbul Mujahideen etc. Who would arrange co-ordination and consensus for negotiation among these disparate groups? The stone pelters have no stake in any of these factions, neither any proposal or agenda for solution. 4 Sadly enough, India, it seems, awakened to the lurking risk of developing Jihadi dimension of the Kashmir knot at a much later stage. In fact, the field dynamics in Kashmir started changing with the Soviet military intervention of Afghanistan in December 1979 culminating in Moscow s defeat in During the course of Afghan resistance, Pakistan, which became prime training ground of Mujahideen and served as a conveyor-belt of covert American assistance, developed a nexus with Islamic militancy. To quote Rifaat Hussain, The Afghan jihad also accentuated the role of Islam in Pakistan s strategic culture, giving rise to the belief that the success of the Afghan jihad could be replicated elsewhere and it offered an option to bring an end to non-muslim domination of the Muslims. Thus, after the withdrawal of the Soviet forces from Afghanistan in 1989, Kashmir became the new Jihad.... Backed by the ISI, continues Hussain, these jihadi groups prominent among which were the Hizbul Mujahidin, the Al Badr Mujahideen, Harkat ul-mujahedin, the Lashkar-i- Tayyiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammed found a new cause in Indian-administered Kashmir...Their involvement in the Kashmiri Intifada transformed it from a domestic insurgency (conducted via the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front) into a low-intensity conflict between India and Pakistan. Besides, it is also very interesting to follow how cooked-up stories were intentionally floated to add fuel to inter-state feud by some of the sectarian organizations based in Pakistan as evident from journalist Luv Puri s account in his book Across the LOC: Inside Pakistan Administered Jammu and Kashmir (Penguin, Viking, 2010). There he mentions, the jihad in Kashmir is presented as a necessity by organizations like Jamat ud Dawa to save Punjab s agriculture. Hafiz Saeed organized a rally of farmers in Punjab province and alleged that India was in the process of constructing several dams on Chenab, Jhelum and Indus river in a bid to completely stop flow of water towards Pakistan. This was the height of lie which was even contradicted by the Pakistani state by demonstrating some maturity when admitting that it would be wrong to blame India for Pakistan s water scarcity for agriculture. Here a line of comparison of Pakistan s 48 World Focus July 2017

49 policy to AJK with China s OBOR seems pertinent. As Bibek Debroy aptly puts in his post editorial A new lunatic express: OBOR projects are stacking the deck for Chinese enterprises and banks in ToI dated 2 nd June 2, 2017 about areas of confusion hovering over the African economies centering on modes of Chinese financing (grants or soft loans, not very clear) for infrastructure. His line of argument being, benefits would be reaped by the Chinese while costs of these projects are mostly to be borne internally by the African economies. So there is ample reason to believe that the OBOR is latest Chinese ploy to export the hidden costs of its economic expansion overseas. Similarly, Pakistan s policy to AJK seems to be prompted by the compulsion of exporting its own domestic difficulties to Kashmir, the difficulties related to first, power conflict between military and political establishment in Pakistan, secondly, festering economic crisis and thirdly, Kashmir policy also provides Pakistani state with much needed diversion strategy to focus away attention from widespread deprivation of its people. If that is so, the question is why we are yet to develop adequate policy line befitting to expose Pakistan and achieve some sort of breakthrough in the current impasse or is there still a serious lacuna that we have not thought of? No doubt, when we talk of Kashmir, actually we talk of tug of war between India and Pakistan, hence requiring us to go beyond the myopic realist paradigm and to think deeply with inwardlooking approach. This is rising necessity because we have to appreciate also Jammu s uneasy relationship with the politics of Kashmiri identity and its political discourse of azadi. So when the roots of the conflict lie in Kashmir, the solution cannot emerge unless an internal consensus within the state is evolved and Jammu is involved in the process. In this context what Professor Rekha Chowdhary of the University of Jammu comments seems extremely crucial for understanding competing identity structures anchored on local, regional and pan-indian nationalisms. In her opinion, though initially the relationship between Jammu and Kashmir was not very problematic, yet the challenge was big enough to respond to the Kashmiri urge for distinct identity by providing the special constitutional status for the state and at the same time to help produce the consent for this arrangement within the Jammu region (Rekha Chowdhary s article Caught in a Tangle published in an anthology entitled A Tangled Web Jammu and Kashmir, 2011, Harper Collins). Day by day, however, the challenge became bigger since aggressive form of Kashmiri nationalism tried to take centre stage of state politics and thus put itself in an antagonistic relationship with Indian nationalism. This evoked the competing response of Jammu being informed by an emphatic assertion of Indian nationalism as a means of contestation of Kashmiri nationalism ( Chowdhary, ibid). Not only this, but what is perhaps more important in the realm of politics is the issue of representation in which despite Kashmir being involved in exclusivity of identity and separatist politics, it seeks to make claims for the entire state. It does not, however, mean there is no other identity but all seem to be engulfed or sought to be engulfed coercively by the ideologues of Kashmir separatism riding rough shod over smaller ethnic groups, their regional and sub-regional claims, the claims of various kinds of displaced people, including the 1947-displaced from Pakistan-administered Kashmir, West Pakistan refugees, war-time border-displaced people and last but not the least, displaced Kashmiri Pandits. So, the fix is what is to be done. On one side, separatism is on the rise and taking on a dangerous jihadist turn with IS connect of late transforming it into a far more complicated realm where Al Qaeda in Indian Sub continent (AQIS) is likely to compete for influence with the IS. On the other, if you divide the state of Jammu and Kashmir it would bound to complicate the situation further for the simple reason that such a division would unleash communal forces and instead of ethnic-regional divide between the Kashmir and Jammu regions, it would end up being the religious divide between Muslim Kashmir and Hindu Jammu. The communal fault line would be specially drawn in the Muslim-majority areas of the Jammu region both the Doda belt as well as the Pounch- Rajouri belt. Already, there is an ongoing discourse, which seeks to simplistically deal with the issue of political divergence by dividing the state on religious lines and merging the Muslim-dominated areas of Jammu region with Kashmir. This would not only go against the plural ethos of the region as well as the state, but would actually create a partition-like situation, particularly in the areas, which are mixed Prognosis of Kashmir Crisis: Hobsonean Choice? 49

50 and living harmoniously so far ( Sammadar quoted by Rekha Chowdhary in her article). This, we think, resembles a catch 22 situation. It is because maintaining integrity of Jammu and Kashmir is important. Hence, accepting divergence of views and possible consensus need to be worked out which stands on the precondition of dialogue, both internal and also with the representatives of AJK. But in the condition of ongoing jihad against Indian state, possibility of any negotiated settlement is but a thin possibility, at times only to be initiated under the pressure of the US in particular, which feels apprehensive that a war between India and Pakistan might derail its military campaign against al-qaeda network in Afghanistan and further westward targeting Iran. The talk of war or more precisely limited war between India and Pakistan arises because Pakistan s traditional security dilemma visà-vis India has considerably eased after successful nuclear tests in So, now Pakistan can defend itself and moreover, it can go for proxy war relatively successfully, in which the larger jihadi elements the less costly the conflict would be for Pakistan. As such, military mobilization and modernizing our capabilities from Indian viewpoint is becoming indispensable to contain the unrest from time to time, albeit offering a temporary hedge at best, and even a cause of occasional rejoice for the political elite in New Delhi as evident after the surgical strike in 2016, but with a soulful realization that it is not a stable option, certainly not a panacea. It is as fateful for India as it is for Pakistan and broadly, south Asia that continues to slide down to the precipice of risk of military conflict with no state but the hydra of Islamic militancy at large, thus creating a bleak future for the inhabitants caught up in the conundrum and unable, as a result, to access foreign investment and thus remain stuck in the groove of poverty and divisiveness. In this specter of violence, interstate obduracy and clouds of political uncertainty strongly hanging over the horizon, perhaps a glimmer of hope could be by way of devising strong pressure from civil society 5 including educated and enlightened sections of Muslim community to urge the misguided youth 6 of the over-islamised valley to move away from the path of militancy 7 in the interest of opening some channel of dialogue for that alone can set the ball rolling by allowing democratic mechanism to take precedence on radical Islamic path. Besides, as colonel Jaibans Singh has written in a recent piece entitled Nuances of Conflict Communication (the net version released on June 2, 2017 in the website of that what is required in Kashmir at the moment is an understanding of nuanced implications of conflict communication as a young Indian lieutenant Umar Fayaz was brutally lynched by the terrorists, not the blame game or media sensationalism. Endnotes: 1 It is inclusive of the Northern Area (the Gilgit, Baltistan and Diamont districts) administered by Pakistan, spreading over 82,010 sq kilometres) with a population of 6-7 lakhs of people living in 645 villages and towns, which India does not recognize as part of Pakistan. According to India, it was part of Jammu and Kashmir state by virtue of Maharaja Hari Singh s pact to accede in favour of India. 2 In a recent write up Nuances of Conflict Communication, Colonel Jaibans Singh has put similar questions like is Kashmir slipping out of Indian control? etc which are causing considerable anxiety across the nation. However, Colonel Singh provides a well-meaning suggestion that there is no cause for any panic. 3 Inputs are also pouring in about sources of financial assistance received by IS. As President Putin in a recent press meeting revealed that different Islamic state units are getting pecuniary assistance from 40 countries and there are some of the G20 members also. That money to the IS coffers is also coming from illegal trade of oil and petroleum products from Syria has been confirmed by Iraqi intelligence and US sources. 4 Bartaman Patrika, second largest Bengali daily recently published a news claiming that the Bangladeshi boys are trained in different centres in south India viz. Chennai, Hyderabad and Bangalore to throw stones and to mount fidayan attacks on Indian army in Kashmir ( Bartaman Patrika dated June 2, 2017). 5. It is really surprising that the enlightened Muslims who could have registered their voice by virtue of their position and service in upper echelons of government and in private sector including business, with constructive suggestions have been almost missing from the scenario and keeping mum in spite of the fact many teenagers and youth of the valley were either victims of prolong conflict and clash between government and the separatists. 6. According to the officials of Indian army, the term misguided youth is misnomer because these youth receive payment for throwing stones at Indian police and security forces. Not only that but these youth are confirmed jihadists who target Indian forces in Kashmir as an army of occupation and hence to be thrown out. So, using the term misguided youth is not appropriate because throwing stones at the security personnel is meant to kill the soldiers on duty. Hence, India s army chief Bipin Rawat has likened the conflict situation in Kashmir as dirty war which has to be fought with innovative ways. This reaction came after there was widespread negative media propaganda when one major Gogoi tied a common man to an army jeep and used him as human shield from stone throwers. However, some channels have maintained that the officer had responded to an SOS call from a section of paramilitary soldiers who found themselves surrounded by a violent mob. Hence to deter local youth from attacking his vehicle, he strapped a Kashmiri to the bonnet. Although this cannot be a fair justification for the act, it may be mentioned that the drawing room radicals who blame the Indian army for this act need to remember that using human shield was invented by the communists long before in the 1950s. Although there is a danger on both sides, since Indian army might have to face tougher and more challenging battle ground in Kashmir as a result of sorting to human shield which means such tactics could come back as boomerang. Besides, army chief s suggestion that it would been better to engage with the stone pelters, if they had taken to firing instead of throwing stones at security personnel. But according to Subir Bhaumik, former BBC correspondent from South Asia, Indian army should not commit such mistaken step as firing indiscriminately targeting at the masses on the road, one done by Pakistani army in 1971 war in the then east Pakistan because that could open a wider front of disproportionate opposition by bringing more crowd tilting the balance against India. 7. Subir Bhaumik, former BBC correspondent from South Asia, opines that the present unrest in Kashmir is a homegrown agitation fuelled by heavy-handed counter-insurgency measures. No doubt, it is supported by Pakistan but it has a domestic base but that is not realised by most and the nation seems to be in exactly the kind of self denial that he thinks Pakistanis suffered in His suggestion is that we should not repeat the same mistakes of Pakistan. With regard to possibility of dialogue, his take is that if you can talk to Nagas, who have fought against India for 60 years, why cannot India talk to Kashmiris and negotiate a settlement on similar lines shared sovereignty and all that. But the real difficulty lies in as we have stated in the substantial part of the aforesaid article, in the condition of leaderless groups and splinter factions of youth terrorists who have no institutional arrangement with which to initiate talks References (Books) Bahl, Arvin, From Jinnah to Jihad Pakistan s Kashmir Quest and the Limits of Realism, Atlantic, Dossani, Rafiq and Rowen, Henry S.(Ed), Peace in South Asia, Orient BlackSwan, Pande, Ira (Ed.), A Tangled Web Jammu & Kashmir, Harper Collins, Puri, Luv, Across the LOC: Inside Pakistan Administered Jammu and Kashmir (Penguin, Viking, Roy, Olivier, Jihad and Death: Global Appeal of Islamic State, Hurst, Periodicals: Open Magazine, September 5, 2016 issue, May 1, 2017 Issue & May 29, 2017 issue. Newspapers: Bartaman Patrika dated 2 nd June, Dainik Sanbad, Agartala, 17/05/2017. Times of India dated 2 nd June, Webpage: accessed on June 3, accessed on June 3, accessed on June 4, World Focus July 2017

51 Turbulence in PoK: The China Factor Dr. Netajee Abhinandan Kashmir, once again, is in turmoil. Peace eludes the state as large scale violence, killings, blasts and uprisings dominate the scene severely affecting daily lives of the people. With the dramatic rise in infiltration from across the border coupled with internal resentment against some of the policies and actions of the ruling regime, Kashmir remains on the edge. The efforts of the Indian government, both political and military, have failed to restore peace and normalcy in Kashmir. The situation is exacerbated by violence purported by the non-state actors and terrorist organizations operating from Pakistan, supported by its military and intelligence agencies. On the other hand, massive unrest and antipathy of people against Pakistani government in Pak occupied Kashmir (PoK) have led to internationalisation of the whole Kashmir problem. While India has never abdicated its claim over PoK, China s intensive investment in big infrastructural projects to create China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) under the flagship of much touted One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative in this region raise serious concerns for Indian establishment. In this context, it is imperative to examine the strategic implications of OBOR, especially the CPEC, for peace and stability in Kashmir as well as India-Pakistan-China relations. OBOR: Intensifying Connectivity or Hegemonic Expansion? OBOR is the most ambitious initiative undertaken by China ostensibly to establish connectivity and cooperation by linking China to around sixty countries of Asia, Europe and Africa though both land and sea routes. First announced by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2013 during his visit to Kazakhstan, it has since gathered momentum with nearly 70 countries and organizations committing themselves to the mega infrastructural project. The recently concluded Belt and Road Summit in Beijing was attended by leaders from 29 countries including the U.S. and Russia, as well as the heads of the United Nations, International Monetary Fund and World Bank providing it legitimacy and recognition. At the Summit, Xi proposed to invest additional 780 billion yuan as he called for greater cooperation for better economic gains and connectivity. In his speech, Xi reiterated Beijing s objectives for the Belt and Road initiative. We will not follow the old way of geopolitical games during the push for the Belt and Road Initiative, but create a new model of win-win and cooperation. It will not form a small group undermining stability, but is set to build a big family with harmonious co-existence. China s construction of the Belt and Road Initiative is not to make a new start, but to connect development strategies of different countries and complement each other s advantages... China is willing to share its development experience with all the rest of the world, but we will not intervene into other nation s internal affairs, export our social system and development model, nor force others to accept them. We will build an open platform, defend and develop an open world economy, jointly create an environment good for opening-up and development, and push for a just, reasonable and transparent international trade and investment system so that production materials can circulate orderly, be allocated with high efficiency and markets are deeply integrated. 1 However, OBOR is not merely a connectivity project as proclaimed by China; rather it is a well calculated strategy to expand its political influence across the continents, enhance its economic power by massive investments and providing leverage to Chinese companies and establish itself as the unchallenged leader of both the globe and the process of globalization. Though China consistently maintains that it does not aspire any kind of leadership position, analysts believe that through such a humongous and capital-intensive project, China wants to recast the global political order putting itself at the helm. With a perceptible decline in American power and President Turbulence in PoK: The China Factor 51

52 Trump s inward-looking policy orientation, China is keen to make a leap forward to the top of global political structure replacing the U.S. CPEC: The Issue of Sovereignty India chose to boycott the OBOR Summit even as the whole neighbourhood joined and hailed the Chinese initiative, citing the issues of sovereignty and legitimacy over the proposed CPEC that would run through PoK. India has taken the stand that it cannot be part of such an initiative unless the issue of sovereignty is sorted out on those areas of PoK through which CPEC would traverse. For India, CPEC, the most important section of OBOR, threatens its territorial integrity and sovereignty. Making India s position clear, Indian foreign ministry spokesman Gopal Baglay said in the official statement: Regarding the so-called China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is being projected as the flagship project of the BRI/OBOR, the international community is well aware of India s position. No country can accept a project that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity... Connectivity initiatives must follow principles of financial responsibility to avoid projects that would create unsustainable debt burden for communities; balanced ecological and environmental protection and preservation standards; transparent assessment of project costs; and skill and technology transfer to help long term running and maintenance of the assets created by local communities. 2 India which regards the whole of Jammu & Kashmir as its integral part does not wish to compromise even at the cost of being seen as isolationist. On the other hand, China, instead of addressing Indian concerns, chooses to support Pakistan s position to fulfil its own strategic interests. As per the CPEC plan details, the Chinese government and banks will give loans to Chinese companies for investing $15.5 billion in coal, wind, solar and hydropower projects, that would come online by 2017, and help Pakistan to add 10,400 MW of electricity to its national grid. Expected to ease Pakistan s energy shortages by covering both generation and transmission, the $75 billion CPEC, which is to become operational by 2020, entails building new roads, an 1,800-km railway line, a network of oil pipelines connecting Kashgar in China s western Xinjiang region to the port of Gwadar, along with an airport at the port, apart from a string of energy projects, special economic zones, dry ports and other infrastructure. 3 Though there is nothing new about Chinese assistance to Pakistan, its massive investment in and around Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) makes India apprehensive about the probable encirclement of its territory by the Sino-Pakistan alliance. Despite China s claims that the project is commercial in nature, its potential for intelligence gathering and the forward deployment of its naval assets in the Gwadar and Karachi ports makes India uncomfortable. India quite reasonably believes that China s presence in PoK would adversely affect and further complicate the process of border negotiations. 4 India is deeply concerned about Chinese moves as it spells a strategic nexus between China and Pakistan against Indian interests in the region. India fears that in the event of another conflict with China, the ongoing infrastructure projects undertaken by the Chinese military and nuclear establishments in Pakistan Occupied Gilgit-Baltistan region may become strategically important to the Chinese army; especially, the Karakorum Highway could be useful for China as an overland route for moving missiles and spare parts to Pakistan. Also, China s aggressive pursuance of CPEC despite protests from India signals a discernible shift in its attitude towards the Kashmir issue as it intends to provide international legitimacy to Pakistani claims through this project. This may mark a nuanced Chinese position on Kashmir implying a dilution of China s past stand of accepting Kashmir as a de-facto part of India, while at the same time treating POK including Gilgit-Baltistan region as defacto and de-jure parts of Pakistan. 5 Thus, India rightfully feels that China s growing economic and geo-political involvement in PoK along with its continuous military support to Pakistan would inevitably create serious problems and undermine its interests in the long term. India s refusal to join OBOR and the continuation of CPEC would not only affect India- Pakistan-China trilateral relations but political atmosphere in South Asia also. PoK: The Internal Resentment It is not India alone in raising alarm over CPEC; the people of PoK are also strongly against the project. 52 World Focus July 2017

53 There have been massive protests on the streets of Pakistan-occupied Gilgit-Baltistan region against atrocities of Pakistani government and also the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which they said would only benefit China and Pakistan s Punjabi traders. The protesters allege that CPEC does not involve local people, especially the youth, and Pakistan, backed by China, is inflicting massive human rights abuses to crush the political aspirations of the people of Gilgit. Over 500 young Gilgitis have been jailed, including Gilgit s top political activist Baba Jan, which saw increasing mass street-based movement for his release. 6 The people of Gilgit-Baltistan believe that the CPEC will exploit its water resources which would only benefit Pakistan. They are also worried about the growing Chinese influence in the region. 7 The Gilgit-Baltistan based Awami Action Committee (AAC), an alliance of around 23 religious, nationalist and political groups, has been demanding withdrawal of Pakistani security forces and rollbacks of the CPEC. It is also against the lack of share for Gilgit- Baltistan in the CPEC. Not only in Gilgit-Baltistan, people are up in arms against Chinese presence and CPEC in Sindh also that passes through it. Jeay Sindh Muttahida Mahaz (JSMM), a Sindh-based nationalist party, has been opposing the CPEC terming it as trigger of international conflicts and nuclear arms race in the region and strategic military design of Chinese aggression over the Indian ocean. 8 Pakistan s control over the strategically important region has been used to keep India circumscribed in limited geopolitical sphere. The territory swap, building of the Karakoram Highway and Chinese infrastructure intrusion in parts of PoK are meant not only to strengthen China-Pakistan partnership but to encircle India also. Apart from massive economic and military support to Pakistan, China s wanton disregard of India s concerns, its veto against moves to designate terrorists like Maulana Masood Azhar at the UN and blockade of India s entry into the NSG indicate a belligerence towards India. 9 The Indian Response Before the start of the CPEC, in December 2014, the Chinese state-run Xinhua published a statement announcing the closure of the strategic Khunjerab Pass and in the process referred to Gilgit-Baltistan as part of Pakistan. 10 China, until then, had maintained that J&K was a bilateral problem that should be resolved through dialogue between India and Pakistan. The shift in Chinese approach-legitimizing Gilgit- Baltistan as part of Pakistan- generates problems for India. India believes that CPEC, originating in Gilgit- Baltistan, would eventually strengthen Pakistan s claim and control over this region. The Indian government s official response to CPEC came through the reply to a specific query in Lok Sabha in December 2014 by Minister for External Affairs Sushma Swaraj : Government is aware that China is involved in the construction of or assistance to infrastructure projects in our neighborhood including in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Myanmar; hydroelectric and IT projects in Nepal; IT and housing construction projects in Maldives; hydroelectric & nuclear projects, highways, motorways, export processing zones and economic corridors in Pakistan. Government has seen reports with regard to China and Pakistan being involved in infrastructure building activities in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK), including construction of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Government has conveyed its concerns to China about their activities in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, and asked them to cease such activities. 11 In 2015 China and India sought strategic realignments, not only to secure their own interests, but also to contain each other s influence and power. Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Pakistan in April 2015 and pledged to invest $46 billion- almost double the amount he proposed for India- for developing the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). In the Gilgit-Baltistan segment, the CPEC project design includes a major expansion of the Karakoram Highway, establishing industrial parks in special economic zones, constructing hydropower projects, railway line and road building. The project also entails building hydropower projects and motorways/ highways in the so-called Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK). Moreover, the Gwadar port, overlooking one of the world s busiest shipping lanes in the Arabian Sea, has been leased to Beijing for 40 years. New Delhi fears that the port would be used as a naval outpost by China, thereby threatening India s energy Turbulence in PoK: The China Factor 53

54 and economic security, as more than two thirds of India s petroleum imports pass through the area. Though India is yet to come out a comprehensive response to the CPEC, Prime Minister Narendra Modi made it clear that it won t be a mute spectator to the affairs unfolding in PoK in a statement issued on 13 August, 2015: Pakistan forgets that it bombs its own citizens using fighter planes. The time has come when Pakistan shall have to answer to the world for the atrocities committed by it against people in Balochistan and K-P. 12 Again during his Independence Day speech on 15 August in 2015, he reiterated India s support to the people of PoK; first for any Prime Minister. It was not only a direct warning to Pakistan, but a subtle notice to China also. On 17 January, 2017, speaking at a seminar in New Delhi, Prime Minister said: Only by respecting the sovereignty of countries involved, can regional connectivity corridors fulfil their promise and avoid differences and discord. 13 India s opposition to CPEC was reaffirmed by Foreign Secretary, S.Jaishankar, two days later: We expect they respect other people s sovereignty. The CPEC passes through a territory that we see as our territory. Surely people will understand what [the] Indian reaction is. There needs to be some reflection and I am sorry to say that we have not seen signs of that. 14 India s opposition to CPEC reflects its concern over the internationalisation of the Kashmir dispute and the growing influence of China in the Indian Ocean. The Road Ahead CPEC is the most important component of OBOR that would immensely boost China s exports and provide the much needed fillip to Chinese companies by linking Western China to Middle East and Central Asia. For Pakistan also, the corridor would generate huge benefits as the combined value of the CPEC s infrastructure projects would be equivalent to 17 percent of Pakistan s GDP creating around 700,000 direct jobs between 2015 and 2030 and add up to 2.5 percent to the country s growth rate. Considering the importance of the project for China and Pakistan, mere protests by India will not deter them from carrying forward it. India has to recalibrate its approach and come out with well thought out strategic response that would force China to accommodate its concerns. Footnotes 1 Full Text of President Xi s speech at opening of Belt and Road forum, 16 May, 2017 available at /news.xinhuanet.com/english/ /14/ c_ htm 2 India to boycott China s OBOR summit, says CPEC ignores its territorial integrity, Times of India, 13 May, Zofeen T Ebrahim, China s New Silk Road: What s in it for Pakistan?, Dawn, April 20, 2015, at / 5 D.S. Rajan, China: President Xi Jinping s South Asia policy- Implications for India, South Asia Analysis Group at node/ PoK Protesters Against China-Pakistan Economic Corridor To Be Charged Under Anti-Terrorism Laws, 19 August, 2016, India Defense News at Anti-China protests in Sindh to oppose economic corridor, Hindustan Times, 19 January, Priyanka Singh, CPEC A Misnomer: India must Rename It, The Pioneer, 18 June, Khunjerab Pass closes for winter season, Xinhua, December 2, 2014, athttp://news.xinhuanet.com/ english/china/ /02/c_ htm QNO260PROJECTS+OF+CHINA+AND+PAKISTAN+IN+ NEIGHBOURING+COUNTRIES 12 Modi spoke India s mind over CPEC, The Express Tribune, 20 August, Does the China-Pakistan economic corridor worry India?, Aljazeera News at n-economic-corridor-worry-india html 14 Ibid 54 World Focus July 2017

55 India, PoK and CPEC: Narrowing the Corridor of Indo-Pakistan Relations Dr. Mohor Chakraborty India s reservations to the CPEC since its initiation by Beijing as an integral part of OBOR (renamed B&RI) did not come as a great surprise to the international community, overridden by New Delhi s concerns over sovereignty with respect to the Corridor passing through PoK. The recent boycott of the Inaugural B&RI Forum by India substantiated its sustained and unwavering posture on the issue. While the ambience is charged with arguments weighing New Delhi s decision to boycott the Forum, it indeed represents its assertive, nationalist posture. The CPEC, prima facie, is a developmental project, embarked upon by China, with an astounding investment in establishing a network of roads, ports, dams and special economic zones, in Pakistan. However, it has been interpreted in several informed circuits as a blueprint for establishing Chinese hegemony by pouring in capital, labour and technology in a developing country. As present circumstances reveal, India will be viewing this grand Chinese project as a dubious facade for augmenting its influence and hegemony, notwithstanding Beijing s arguments and statements, to the contrary. Four years following the announcement of its grand One Belt, One Road Project (rechristened Belt and Road Initiative/B&RI), China took the centre-stage, playing host to representatives from 130 countries, more than half of which (about 68) have embarked on the project, at the inaugural B&R Summit/Forum for International Cooperation held in Beijing on May India is the only country in South Asia which has not signed any agreement pertaining to the Chinese President, Xi Jinping s ambitious OBOR project. The project, manifesting a revival of the ancient Chinese trade routes, known as Silk Road, which stretched from the then Chinese capital Xi an to Rome, includes four broad components: Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB); the Maritime Silk Road (MSR); the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB); and the Bangladesh China India Myanmar/BCIM-Economic Corridor. Among these components, the 21 st Century MSR is the maritime counterpart of the over-land SREB envisioned to be established along the Eurasian land corridor from the Pacific coast to the Baltic Sea. On the whole, the extensive domain of the B&R architecture runs through the continents of Asia, Europe and Africa, connecting the vibrant East Asian economic circle at one end and the European economic circle at the other. While the SREB focuses on bringing together China, Central Asia, Russia and Europe (the Baltic) linking China with the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean Sea through Central Asia and West Asia and connecting China with Southeast Asia, South Asia and the Indian Ocean, the 21 st Century MSR is designed to take off from China s coast to Europe through the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean, in one route, and from China s coast through the South China Sea to the South Pacific, in the other. Served by a network of roads, high-speed railways, fibre-optical lines, transcontinental submarine optical cable projects and satellite information passageways, the initiative is poised to shift the centre of geo-economic power towards Eurasia. Beijing calculates that the mega-trade volumes among the Silk Road economies would reach a tune of US$ 2.5 trillion over the next decade. 1 It really did not come as a great surprise to the international community, when India, a nonsignatory of B&RI did not have any representation at the just-concluded B&RI Forum for International Cooperation, since it has serious reservations to the flagship programme and the most advanced component of the initiative US$ 54 billion worth China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) passing through Gilgit-Baltistan in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and connecting Xinjiang to the Gwadar port in Balochistan via PoK, giving Beijing maritime access to West Asia and Africa substantially by almost 2000 miles and vice versa. Geographically speaking, it will stretch from the Western Chinese city of Kashgar in the Xinjiang province to the port of Gwadar, thus India, PoK and CPEC: Narrowing the Corridor of Indo-Pakistan Relations 55

56 providing China an access to the Arabian Sea barely 600 km east of the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 35% of the world s oil shipments passes. While the ambience is charged with arguments weighing New Delhi s decision to boycott the Forum, it indeed represents its assertive, nationalist posture. Given this backdrop, the article will analyse India s response to CPEC and the counter-responses of China and Pakistan on the same. CPEC: Its Components and Implications for Pakistan s Political Economy The CPEC component of China s grandiose B&RI envisages a deep and broad-based penetration of most sectors of Pakistan s economy as well as its society by Chinese enterprises and culture, apparently throwing open an unprecedented scope in Pakistan s history. In the areas of interest contained in the plan, it appears that access to the full supply chain of the agrarian economy is a top priority for the Chinese. This is followed by the capacity of the textile spinning sector to serve the raw material needs of Xinjiang, and the garment and value added sector to absorb Chinese technology. The third priority is the growing domestic market, particularly in cement and household appliances, which receives detailed treatment in the plan. Finally, through greater financial integration, the plan seeks to advance the internationalization of the Renminbi (RMB), as well as diversify the risks faced by Chinese enterprises entering Pakistan. 2 Far more than a transit route, US$ 27 billion worth of CPEC resources are, in fact, allocated to undertake eighteen power projects. The other half of the total US$ 54 billion goes beyond support for the Gwadar port complex and will include the engineering of four national trunk highways, overhaul or construction of three mainline railways, the start of a metro system in Lahore and a cross-country pipeline. According to the Pakistan Board of Investment, the main components of the corridor are: Gwadar (Port, City and Gwadar region s socioeconomic development); Energy (coal, hydel, wind, solar, LNG, transmission); Transport infrastructure (road, railways, aviation); and Information Technology (IT). To begin with, the Gwadar Port free zone was inaugurated in April 2016 by the Chinese highlighting the immense trading potential of Gwadar and largely, Balochistan. On operationalisation, the Gwadar Port is expected to transport roughly one million tons of cargo (by 2017). Gwadar is positioned as the direct hinterland connecting Balochistan and Afghanistan. As a CPEC entrepot, the plan recommends that it be built into a base of heavy and chemical industries, such as iron and steel/petrochemical. The ground breaking of Gwadar International Airport (GIA) and Eastbay Expressway is also scheduled to take place soon. GIA is a US$ 260 million project with the capacity to handle some of the world s largest airplanes, while the Expressway is expected to at least have three routes linking Gwadar with the rest of Pakistan. Secondly, on the energy front, around 21 projects (worth US$ 33.7 bi) have been identified to help the energy needs of the Corridor along with upgradation of the ailing power sector of Pakistan. The energy project entails the construction of Diamer Bhasha Dam and Dassu Dam (4500MW) with PKR (Pakistan Rupee) 100 billion spent in land acquisition for Bhasha Dam. Krote Hydro project (720MW) and Sukhi Kinaro Hydro Poject (870MW) are also in the pipeline for 2018 in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa. 3600MW will be produced by Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) by 2017, whereas nuclear power plants are being upgraded to produce 2200MW. Renewable energy projects are in the offing with 500MW to be reaped from wind and another 1000MW from solar power, particularly in Quaid-e-Azam solar part from Bahawalpur, towards which, around US$ 3 billion has been allocated to augment power distribution. On the transport and infrastructure front, many projects are on the fast track, including the enhancement of Karakoram Highway: 335 km section between Khunjerab to Raikot has been upgraded and 59 km section of Hazara motorway between Burhan and Havelian is expected to be completed by the end of The immensely important Western route (Havelian-Gwadar) has been inaugurated. Two key projects include Zhob-Mughal Kot section of the Dera Ismail Khan Qilla Saifullah Highway (N50) and the Qilla Saifullah Waigam Rud Road section of the Multan-Dera Ghazi Khan-Qilla Saifullah Highway (N70), while work is expected to commence on the eastern route on 120 km section of Karakoram Highway II between Thakot and Havelian and a 392 km section of Lahore Karachi motorway between 56 World Focus July 2017

57 Multan and Sukkur, for which, approximately US$ 4.2 billion concessionary loan package has been approved by the Chinese Parliament. Pakistan Railways is also getting a lifeline with a sum of US$ 8.5 billion being pumped in for the ailing sector. The existing mainline; Karachi-Peshawar and Taxila- Havelian (ML km long will be upgraded), new dry port at Havelian is planned to be completed by 2020, laying another track to make two tracks between Shandara-Peshawar. A new track is also planned from Gwadar-Quetta and Jacobabad via Besima. Similarly other projects are under way which will ultimately link Gwadar with Khunjerab by CPEC provides avenues of regional integration among Pakistan, China and central Asian countries, within the framework of which, the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project has attracted US$ 7 billion, in addition to the prospects of a Chinese company laying the Gwadar- Nawabshah pipeline and setting up a LNG terminal at Gwadar. Besides, an important domain of CPEC is the development of Information Technology infrastructure, with proposals to lay US$ 44 million km long optical fibre from Khunjerab to Rawalpindi, which would act as an alternative communication route between Pakistan and China. 3 The CPEC, prima facie, is a developmental project, embarked upon by China, with an astounding investment in establishing a network of roads, ports, dams and special economic zones, in Pakistan. However, it has been interpreted in several informed circuits as a blueprint for establishing Chinese hegemony by pouring in capital, labour and technology in a developing country. The socio-political implications of such a massive undertaking are immense with thousands of acres of agricultural land leased to Chinese enterprises for projects relating to seeds, irrigation, fertilizer, processing units for fruits, vegetables, fish, meat and grain along with storage and transport systems. For instance, two dams to be built in the Gilgit-Baltistan region, displacing an estimated 28,000 people and submerging important archaeological sites has severe ecological implications for Pakistan. Besides, the political implications of the same are by no means less significant, since the Gilgit- Baltistan region is within Indian territory (PoK). It is discernible that the entry of Chinese firms will not be limited to the CPEC framework alone, as the recent acquisition of the Pakistan Stock Exchange, and the impending acquisition of K Electric demonstrates. Furthermore, the installation of safe city surveillance facilities from Peshawar to Karachi with 24-hour recording of roads and markets and fibreoptic cables not only for the Internet, but also for television programmes which will be engaged in disseminating Chinese culture, will naturally facilitate its pervasiveness in Pakistan. One of the oldest priorities for the Chinese government since talks on CPEC began is fibre-optic connectivity between China and Pakistan. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for such a link was signed in July 2013, at a time when CPEC appeared to be little more than a road link between Kashgar and Gwadar. But the plan reveals that the link goes far beyond a simple fibre-optic set up. In this domain, the expanded bandwidth that will open up will enable terrestrial broadcast of digital HD television, called Digital Television Terrestrial Multimedia Broadcasting (DTMB), is envisioned as more than just a technological contribution. It is a cultural transmission carrier. 4 Summarily then, the CPEC architecture is not only grand by Chinese investment standards, but also all-encompassing and pervasive, with undeniable implications for Pakistan s socio-economic and political economy scaffold. CPEC: India s Reservations and Response The Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi s speech at Udhampur, delivered after the inauguration the Chenani-Nashri tunnel in April 2017, clearly and candidly demonstrated his answer to CPEC (of course without directly referring to it). Describing it as not network of roads, but network of hearts, he pledged that the tunnel would evolve as the precursor of a matchless development in Jammu and Kashmir, which would, in turn, make the people of PoK rue their plight under Islamabad and realize how they are missing development under Pakistan. 5 In his message, Modi made an unmistakeable commitment to take the Himalayan state to new heights by employing a strategy of hard work and vision that would be a marvel and wonder for the people on the other side of the border. Underscoring development as our mantra for changing the destiny of the people, he not only provided his developmentdriven submission to the clamour in some quarters that India should join the CPEC to harvest benefits for Jammu and Kashmir and the rest of the country, India, PoK and CPEC: Narrowing the Corridor of Indo-Pakistan Relations 57

58 but also conveyed that India would not legitimise any violation of the international rules in the territory that legally and historically belongs to it. He refused to fall for the bait that India should not object to the CPEC and its passing through Gilgit-Baltistan, and instead be a partner and draw the necessary benefits. 6 The Ministry of External Affairs, issued a comprehensive statement on its objections to the B&RI, which were three-fold: first, the Initiative includes projects in land belonging to India; secondly, the projects could push smaller countries on the road into a crushing debt cycle, destroy the ecology and disrupt local communities; and finally, China s agenda was unclear, with the implied accusation that this Initiative was more about enhancing its regional political influence, rather than simply being its physical networks. 7 India s principal objection stems from the CPEC s geographical stretch, connecting China s Xinjiang province with Pakistan s Gwadar port through Gilgit-Baltistan (in PoK), and ever since the announcement of the CPEC, India has been extremely vocal about its concerns, highlighted successively during the Indian Minister of External Affairs, Sushma Swaraj s visit to Beijing in February 2015, Narendra Modi s visit to China in May 2015, followed by the raising of the issue by Swaraj at the United Nations-General Assembly in October. Swaraj, in course of her official sojourn to Beijing, set the stage for some serious heavy-lifting along a complex geo-political spectrum, when she conveyed that the project should be synergy based. It cannot be a blanket end (on the Indian side). We want our connectivity. 8 The CPEC is believed to suffer from a factual and conceptual objection in India: while the former pertains to India skirting the internationalisation of the Kashmir dispute and the concern that China, which has been neutral on Kashmir since 1963, can no longer be so now that its economic and security interests in these territories are growing in stake, the latter stems from the strategic consideration that CPEC allows China to gain a toehold in the Indian Ocean through direct access to the Arabian Sea. In any case, India would not want a mediating role for China in these disputes. Besides, New Delhi is concerned about China using Gwadar port to observe and even pry on Indian naval activity and possibly even exploit it for an expansion of its naval presence. Finally, though it is true that while in the short and medium terms, CPEC could be an opportunity to generate jobs and growth in Pakistan, over the longer term, its strategic consequences could reshape the regional balance of power in favour of China and limit India s geopolitical reach. The assertiveness and swiftness of Chinese actions in the South China Sea have generated a perception in Indian diplomatic circle that China s gaining of a foothold in the Arabian Sea and, as an extension, in the Indian Ocean through Gwadar, might make national interest claims in India s maritime sphere too, since if Gwadar grows to be the port China envisions it to become, it will need to take on a more engaging, direct or indirect security role in the region. 9 Following up New Delhi s resistance to the CPEC, Swaraj, in course of her Raisina Dialogue address in March 2016, reiterated that connectivity is not just key to India s development ambitions but an important and integral aspect of its vision for international cooperation. It will drive our interests and relationships in Asia and beyond. We bring to bear a cooperative rather than unilateral approach and believe that creating an environment of trust and confidence is the pre-requisite for a more interconnected world. 10 Her statement clearly reflected India s perception of B&RI as a unilateral or a national initiative of China, with a limited role of other participating countries in shaping the priorities of the connectivity projects. Subsequently, Narendra Modi, during his meeting with Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the G-20 Summit in Hangzhou in September 2016, voiced India s sensitivities vis-a-vis the CPEC, given the fact of its passing through PoK as well as the threat of terrorism emanating from the region, further exhorting the Chinese President to be sensitive to each other s strategic interests. Towards this end, while asserting that fight against terror should not be motivated by political considerations, Modi underscored the paramount importance and imperative of respecting each other s aspirations, concerns and strategic interests to ensure durable bilateral ties. He also made it clear that the promotion of positive convergence at the bilateral and wider regional levels, called for the need to prevent the growth of negative perception by both countries. 11 Furthermore, Indian Foreign Secretary, S. Jaishankar s contention that China has not been 58 World Focus July 2017

59 sensitive about India s sovereignty and did not consult New Delhi on the CPEC project before its commencement, was significant. He argued in this regard, China is a country which is very sensitive on matters concerning its sovereignty so we would expect that they would have some understanding of other people s sensitivity about their sovereignty. CPEC passes through a piece of land, which we call Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which is a territory that belongs to India and is illegally occupied by Pakistan. So, the fact that such a project has been initiated without consultation with India, I would imagine, people will understand what the Indian reaction to that would be. So I think in approaching the CPEC, there needs to be some reflection on how a country like India would see would feel I am sorry to say that we have not seen signs of that so far. 12 Soon after, in February 2017, India clarified that it could neither join the project nor attend the Inaugural B&R Forum (May 2017), since the B&RI map indicated Gilgit-Baltistan in Pakistan as part of the CPEC. 13 Such a candid and sharp response by the Foreign Secretary followed Narendra Modi s more caustic and direct assertion, in course of his first public reference to China s ambitious B&RI, highlighting that while India did appreciate the compelling logic of regional connectivity for peace, progress and prosperity, it was averse to the concept of connectivity in itself overriding or undermining the sovereignty of other nations. He further added that, Only by respecting the sovereignty of countries involved can regional connectivity corridors fulfil their promise and avoid differences and discord, thereby questioning the very basis on which the CPEC was hinged. While on the one hand, he conceded that, it was not unnatural for two large neighbouring powers to have some differences, he simultaneously argued, In the management of our relationship, and for peace and progress in the region, both our countries need to show sensitivity and respect for each other s core concerns and interests. 14 CPEC: Counter-responses of China and Pakistan In a rejoinder to the Indian view on the CPEC, China added that it was a development-induced project neither directed at a third country, nor affecting its position on Kashmir. On the question of Pakistan s reported plans to turn Gilgit-Baltistan into a province, in order to tighten its administrative grip, with suggestions of integrating the region into Pakistan s federal structure, the Chinese Foreign Ministry clarified that, The essence of your question is about the Kashmir issue. China s position is consistent and clear cut. We believe it is an issue left over from history and should be resolved between the two sides in dialogue and consultation in a proper manner. The China Pakistan Economic Corridor won t affect China s position on the relevant issue. It further added that the CPEC is a purely commercial venture devised for long term development and cooperation in various fields, significant for fostering regional connectivity, trade cooperation, regional peace and development. Furthermore, it was without prejudice to its views on the disputed status of PoK, which was for India and Pakistan to resolve. 15 Incidentally, this official clarification has been contradictory to its objections of exploration projects in the disputed South China Sea, clearly pointing to Beijing s unequal standards on sovereignty issue. On its part, while reiterating the Indian view of the need to show sensitivity and respect for each other s core concerns and interests towards managing bilateral relations and regional peace and developmental aspirations, Beijing expressed commitment to properly managing existing differences with India and resolving them through friendly consultation. Summarily then, Beijing s defence of the CPEC as a purely commercial project does not address the sensitivities of New Delhi. It is through CPEC in particular and B&RI in general, that China is broadening its regional footprint and intensifying its politico-strategic and economic engagements, both in India s immediate neighbourhood and in PoK. In keeping with the Chinese perspective, Pakistan s dismissal of India s objections to CPEC was quite expected. Finance Minister, Ishaq Dar, while tagging India s reaction as unnecessary, expressed in no uncertain terms that such protests amounted to intervention in Pakistan s internal affairs as well as in a project attempted to promote connectivity and reach out to all the neighbouring countries. He further negated the sharp reaction on New Delhi s part, citing the benefits of the CPEC, intended to foster greater regional connectivity and the India, PoK and CPEC: Narrowing the Corridor of Indo-Pakistan Relations 59

60 developmental imprint it is expected to have on the region as a whole. He expressed doubt regarding the Indian perspective of its national security being threatened and its consideration of sabotage through proxy conflict. On the contrary, he argued that the CPEC fosters restraint and discourages provocation by Pakistan due to the gain in national ego from greater achievement and material development. 16 In this context, it is significant to refer to the Pakistani Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif s veiled swipe at New Delhi s objection, arguing that the multi-billion dollar CPEC was an economic project open to all the nations in the region and it must not be politicised. He added in this regard, Let me make it very clear that CPEC is an economic undertaking open to all countries in the region. It has no geographical boundaries. It must not be politicised. It is time we transcend our differences, resolve conflicts through diplomacy and leave legacy of peace for future generations. 17 Conclusion Under the given circumstances, amidst debates over whether it has been prudent for India to boycott the Inaugural B&RI Forum, held in the Chinese capital on May 2017, Gopal Baglay, the official spokesperson of the Ministry of External Affairs argued in his statement: Regarding the so-called China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is being projected as the flagship project of the OBOR, the international community is well aware of India s position. No country can accept a project that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity. The Indian position was aptly represented by Baglay when he said, Connectivity projects must be pursued in a manner that respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity. Guided by our principled position in the matter, we have been urging China to engage in a meaningful dialogue on its connectivity initiative, One Belt, One Road which was later renamed as Belt and Road Initiative. We are awaiting a positive response from the Chinese side. Besides, hinting at how B&RI projects have been creating bad debt in countries where they have been undertaken, he added: Connectivity initiatives must follow principles of financial responsibility to avoid projects that would create unsustainable debt burden for communities; balanced ecological and environmental protection and preservation standards; transparent assessment of project costs; and skill and technology transfer to help long term running and maintenance of the assets created by local communities, 18 thereby reiterating New Delhi s commitment to anchoring connectivity initiatives on universally recognised international norms, good governance, rule of law, openness, transparency and equality. India s boycott of the B&RI Forum was also an endorsement of its reservations to the CPEC, based on its core consideration of sovereignty, since it passes through PoK, with major geo-strategic implications for national security regarding the Indian concern whether it might influence the disputed Kashmir region. Finally, though China s enhanced geo-economic and geo-strategic leverage in the region may be an acceptable and welcome initiative for its all-weather ally and other regional countries, as present circumstances reveal, India will be maintaining its stoicism on this grand Chinese project of the century as a dubious facade for augmenting its influence and hegemony, notwithstanding Beijing s arguments and statements, to the contrary. Footnotes 1 Vision and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road, 28 March 2015, National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ministry of Commerce of the People s Republic of China, with State Council Authorization, (accessed on 12 May 2017) 2 Khurram Husain, Exclusive: CPEC Master Plan Revealed, The Dawn, 18 May 2017, (accessed on 19 May 2017) 3 Saman Wasae, CPEC: The Milestones, The News International, 12 September 2016, / (accessed on 12 May 2017) 4 Khurram Husain, Exclusive: CPEC Master Plan Revealed, n. 2 5 Ashna Kumar, In Udhampur, PM Narendra Modi asks Youngsters to Choose between Terrorism and Tourism, India Today, 2 April 2017, (accessed on 12 May 2017) 6 Arun Joshi, Modi s Answer to CPEC: India a Game Changer in Region, The Tribune, 5 April 2017, (accessed on 12 May 2017) 7 Suhasini Haidar, Why did India Boycott China s Road Summit?, The Hindu, 20 May Sutirtho Patranobis, Sushma Swaraj Lays Silk Road for PM Modi s China Visit in May, Hindustan Times, 1 February Richard Ghiasy and Jiayi Zhou, The Silk Road Economic Belt: Considering Security Implications and EU-China Cooperation Prospects, SIPRI Report, 22 February 2017, / (accessed on 15 May 2017) 10 Speech by External Affairs Minister at the Inauguration of Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi, 1 March 2016, New Delhi, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, Speeches-Statements.htm?dtl/26432 (accessed on 15 May 2017) 11 PM Modi Raises India s Concerns over CPEC which Runs through PoK, Indian Express, 4 September Shubhajit Ray, On Corridor via PoK, India Showed No Sensitivity: Govt., Indian Express, 19 January Suhasini Haidar, Why did India Boycott China s Road Summit?, n.7 14 Inaugural Address by Prime Minister at Second Raisina Dialogue, 17 January 2017, New Delhi, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, Statements.htm?dtl/27948/Inaugural_Address_by_Prime_Minister_at_Second_ Raisina_Dialogue_New_Delhi_January_17_2017 (accessed on 15 May 2017) 15 Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson, Hua Chunying s Media Briefing, quoted in Ananth Krishnan, China Silent on Link to Pakistan s New Gilgit Ploy, India Today, 17 March 2017, html (accessed on 15 May 2017) 16 Kai Xue, CPEC Aims to bring China, India and Pakistan as part of Xi s One Belt, One Road Policy, Economic Times, 28 March India Boycotts China s B&R Meet, Mounts Diplomatic Pressure Against CPEC, Indian Express, 14 May India Skips China s Belt and Road Forum Summit Ceremony, Economic Times, 14 May World Focus July 2017

61 Strategic Shift in Modi s Pakistan Policy and PoK: The Challenges Ahead Dr. Saleem Ahmad & Dr. Khushbu Gupta Understanding the Region Jammu and Kashmir is an area that includes three conflicted regions such as the Indian administered territory which comprises of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, the Pakistan administered territories of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan, and Chinese administered territories of Aksai Chin and the Trans- Karakoram Highway. The Jammu area is dominant by Hindus with Muslims being in majority in certain areas. The Northern area known as Gilgit-Baltistan illegally occupied by Pakistan and is inhabited by different races like Mongols, Tadjik, Kirghiz and others. 1 The Muslim population is almost equally divided into three sects i.e. Sunni, Shi a as Jaffaria and Ismails. The Kashmir is a territorial conflict primarily between India and Pakistan which started just after the partition of India in Since, India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir including the India-Pakistan wars of 1947 and 1965 as well as the Kargil War of On the one hand, India claims the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir and administers approximately 43% of the region which controls Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh and the Siachen Glacier. On the other, Indian claims are contested by Pakistan which administers approximately 37% of Kashmir region namely Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan region. Further, the Republic of China currently administers Demchok district, the Shaksgam Valley and the Aksai Chin region. India has also disputed China s claims since China took Aksai Chin during the India-China war of Moreover, Gilgit Baltistan is located at the confluence of three geographical regions such as southern, central and eastern Asia. It retains its geopolitical significance and growing Chinese interest in recent years has elevated the region s importance in the regional strategic landscape. As the territorial link between China and Pakistan, the Gilgit Baltistan region is pivotal in the scheme of the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). 4 Pakistan Occupied Kashmir Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) consists of the so called Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit- Baltistan area. It is part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, and hence, an integral part of India. It has been under the illegitimate control of Pakistan since October 22, 1947 when the tribal guerillas supported by Pakistan invaded the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Because of its geo-political location, POK has immense strategic importance for their stake holders. 5 It shares borders with several countries like Pakistan, the Wakhan Corridor of Afghanistan and Tajikistan to the West and the Xinjiang province of the Republic of China to the North. Since, the formation of the Karakoram highway to connect Pakistan with China via POK, the geopolitical significance of POK has also increased manifold in the contemporary era. If POK were under Indian control, the geopolitics of the subcontinent would have been very different from what it is today. This is because POK is the gateway to the Central Asian Republics and to their expanding markets. 6 That is why; the growing Chinese involvement in POK especially in the field of infrastructural development further underlines the strategic value of this area. China seeks strategic depth in this area to extend its influence in the region. In addition, POK is rich in natural resources and these resources have been subjected to exploitation by the government of Pakistan over the years. Therefore, one part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir continues to be under illegal occupation of Pakistan while the other part remains with India after accession of Jammu and Kashmir. Therefore, India has continued maintain that POK is a legitimate part of the Indian Union. 7 Pakistan and China Friendship Pakistan and China have long enjoyed an all weather friendship and continued to strengthen their relations through a strong strategic cooperation in the South Asia region. Pakistan s relations with China have largely been influenced by its security needs and her Strategic Shift in Modi s Pakistan Policy and PoK: The Challenges Ahead 61

62 geopolitical position in the subcontinent. Pakistan continues to see China as a guarantor against India. Its current strain in relations with the US has added more importance to the need for further cementing ties with China. Moreover, Pakistan offers the land locked western part of China a much desired route to the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean which would also provide China an access to Iran and the Gulf region. 8 To meet its ever increasing demands for energy, in the coming years, China would require an uninterrupted supply of crude oil and natural gas from West Asia. The overarching presence of the United States in the Gulf and the Malacca Straits adds to China s fears of its supply route being prohibited in the event of a conflict. At present, the bulk of China s crude oil imports pass through this region. Pakistan and China are working towards a road link that connects the Gwadar Port to China s western border. Here, POK also acts as a link for China s interests in Afghanistan. Pakistan has a common border with the Chinese province of Xinjiang and is linked to Afghanistan and Central Asia through the Wakhan Corridor, a land strip with a width of only 10 miles. 9 Modi s Pakistan Policy As we all know that the PM Modi had invited Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, along with other SAARC leaders to his oath taking ceremony on May 26, 2014 and Nawaz Sharif warmly responded to it. At that time, he received universal praise for his bold initiative to write a new history in India-Pakistan relations. To note that PM Modi certainly gave a fresh offer to Pakistan under his leadership in spite of the track record of Pakistan s backstabbing. This initiative seemed to work and a personal rapport developed between Modi and Sharif. 10 There were exchanges of mangoes, Sarees and talks between officials. PM Modi was still hopeful and he never sounded overtly critical of Pakistan and used his words carefully even if his silence on Pakistan sponsored terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. He did not mention Pakistan in his second Independence Day speech from the Red Fort on August 15, When the Pathankot terrorist attack took place in January 2016, things started deteriorating after it. There were conflicting reports of terrorist attacks which Pakistan had dismissed the evidence given by India. 11 Though Islamabad has never officially been confirmed terrorist activities against India. Moreover, Pakistan has not responded to India s requests to allow its probe team to visit Pakistan. The neighbouring country, in fact, has never sounded serious about probing the incident. PM Modi became much disappointed when Nawaz Sharif declared Burhan Wani a martyr and funeral processions were being held there. Consequently, this all made PM Modi uncomfortable enough to finally abandon his Pakistan policy that he had initiated in the beginning. It seemed that he has finally run out of patience. After three years of his initiative, one can analyze that PM Modi s efforts have proved futile. 12 Strategic Shift in Modi s Policy A tectonic shift came in India s foreign policy towards Pakistan when PM Modi openly talked about the atrocities committed by the Pakistan army on the people of Balochistan. National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval always maintained that if Pakistan interferes in Kashmir, then it should get ready to lose Balochistan. India should have openly supported the Balochistan freedom struggle long ago and should have used the Balochistan issue as an effective lever to counter Pakistan s global propaganda against India over Kashmir. 13 The atrocities committed by the Pakistan army in Balochistan are far more gruesome and inhuman than the alleged human rights violation by the Indian Army in Kashmir. In the beginning, the Modi government was successful in impressing upon the world that India has made every possible attempt to normalize its relationship with Pakistan, but Pakistan has not reciprocated in the same spirit. India has been successful in conveying to the global community that Pakistan is not doing enough to curb terrorism. 14 Moreover, the first indication of strategic shift in PM Modi s policy can be seen when he delivered a speech at all party meeting on Jammu & Kashmir in August 2016, he said, today, when we talk of Jammu and Kashmir we should talk about four parts of the state of Jammu & Kashmir: Jammu, Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Jammu and Kashmir is often called the crown of India. In fact, Jammu and Kashmir is a symbol of the age old commitment of equanimity towards all creeds (Sarv-Panth Sambhaav), where Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Muslims have been living together for centuries. The state of Jammu and Kashmir is the symbol of our founding fathers faith which defines us as Indian in spite of our multiples identity. The Jammu and Kashmir is not only a matter 62 World Focus July 2017

63 of our territorial integrity but also defines our nationhood. We cannot deny the fact that the security forces have suffered a lot of injuries and they have been the target of planned attacks by our neighbour country. Despite this, our security forces have shown restraint. But Pakistan forgets that it bombs its own citizens using fighter planes. The time has come when Pakistan shall have to answer to the world for the atrocities committed by it against people in Baluchistan and POK. The Ministry of External Affairs should make efforts to approach the people of POK residing in different parts of world and collect information about the miserable conditions in POK and bring them to the knowledge of the world community. 15 Moreover, PM Modi in his third Independence Day speech from the Red Fort marked the first instance for an Indian Prime Minister to talk about the situation in Pakistan occupied Kashmir, Gilgit-Baltistan and Balochistan area. In his address, PM Modi hit out at Pakistan for glorifying terrorists and wondered what kind of a country it is that drew inspiration from terror. He said, People from there have thanked him for raising their issues. I want to express my gratitude to some people-the people of Baluchistan, Gilgit and Pakistan occupied Kashmir-for the way they wholeheartedly thanked me, the way they expressed gratitude to me, the way they conveyed their goodwill to me recently. People in distant land, which I have not even seen, people that I have not met...when those people thank the Indian Prime Minister, greet him; it is an honour for the people of the country. 16 Furthermore, the forcible annexation of Balochistan by Pakistan army has always been contested by the Baloch people; it has been ruthlessly exploited for its mineral wealth. The atomic bomb tests were also conducted there. The Pakistan security forces have conducted a brutal and vicious campaign against Balochistan people who are fighting to rid themselves of Pakistan s atrocities. Though a minority in Pakistan, which approximately 7 million populations, Baluchis have been fighting for freedom since The world is still relatively unaware of Pakistani atrocities in this region. 17 The bold decision of PM Modi to get tough on Pakistan has come as a major shift in India s Pakistan policy as for the past 70 years. India remained silent on the issue while Pakistan left no stone unturned to malign India at various international forums. Modi s policy to expose Pakistan has come at a time when China and Pakistan implementing the China Pakistan Economic Corridor. 18 They are actively engaged in strengthening their military infrastructure through POK in a bid to dilute the India s claim over the disputed territory. China has planned to strengthen its military presence in the region by implementing the CPEC project. The project is being constructed by China through the POK to directly connect the strategic Karakoram region which is near the Siachen glacier with Rawalpindi by upgrading and laying almost 1100 kilometres long highway and underground bridges is a direct interference of Beijing in the Indian Territory under the illegal occupation of Pakistan. 19 This has also exposed the double face of Beijing that has been issuing stapled visa to residents of Jammu and Kashmir, and on the other hand, it is investing huge funds to strengthen its infrastructure in POK. While safeguarding its strategic and economic interests through the CPEC, China is also providing an express highway to Pakistan military just near the Line of Control between India and Pakistan. This will provide greater mobility to Pakistani troops in certain inhospitable parts of the LOC. Moreover, the development of the Gwadar Port in Balochistan forms the crux of the CPEC project, as it is envisaged to be the link between China s ambitious One Belt, One Road (OBOR) project. 20 The aim of China is to make more powerful in the South Asia region. Protests against the CPEC have been witnessed in POK, Balochistan, Gilgit and Baltistan where people fear that the project was causing ecological disaster in this region and increasing the presence of Chinese foot prints. As a result, Pakistan has created a separate security force for the safety of Chinese engineers and work force which engaged in implementation of the CPEC particularly in the POK area. India regards the CPEC project negatively as they pass through disputed territory which is claimed by India. Former Indian ambassador, Phunchok Stobdan, alleged that China and Pakistan intended to develop the corridor not just for its economic benefits but also it is motivated by the strategic intent of besieging India. 21 India s Concern and the Issue of Balochistan Therefore, India raised its concern with China over the CPEC project and terrorism emanating from the region. PM Modi told categorically to the Chinese President Xi Jinping the two countries need to be Strategic Shift in Modi s Pakistan Policy and PoK: The Challenges Ahead 63

64 sensitive to each other s strategic interests. Asserting that fight against terror should not be motivated by political considerations. PM Modi said, It is of paramount importance that we should respect each other s aspirations, concerns and strategic interests to ensure durable bilateral ties. 22 He raised India s concerns over the $46 billion CPEC being laid through Pakistan Occupied Kashmir at the G20 summit held in Hangzhou in Besides a host of energy related projects, the CPEC consists of rail, road, and pipelines to ferry oil and gas from Gwadar Port on Arabian Sea to Kashghar in China s Muslim dominated Xinjiang province through POK. On his part, President Xi said, China is willing to work with India to maintain their hard-won sound ties and further boost bilateral cooperation. China and India should respect and care for each other on issues of major concern and handle differences in a constructive way. 23 However, India openly objects to this project because of its claim on the POK and the Baloch people allege that this is a part of Pakistani strategy to exploit the Baluchistan region with the help of the Chinese, not to forget that the Chinese nationals and its assets in use to develop Gwadar are being safe guarded by a strong Pakistani army. Baluchistan region comprises of about 45 % of the total Pakistani area but consists of only about 5% of its total population. 24 It has borders with Iran and Afghanistan and is rich in natural resources. The Baloch nationalists exiled in different countries claim a Baloch genocide has occurred over the years by the Pakistani army. Therefore, PM Modi has signaled a major policy shift towards Pakistan and bound to have a huge impact on the geo-politics of the entire South Asian region. India s tactics of publicly declaring support to the Baluchistan movement will be a game changer in the dynamics of the region, as China will certainly be watching these developments closely. 25 On the other, Pakistan has long accused India of fueling terrorism in Balochistan, its largest province, and of supporting its independence movement. PM Modi holds a bargaining chip in all future discussions on Kashmir by giving India a role in Balochistan. As India views Kashmir as a domestic issue, just as Pakistan views Balochistan, however, PM Modi has just signaled that any move to internationalize Kashmir s issues would be accompanied by a move to internationalize Balochistan s issues. Pakistan reacted forcefully, viewing this as blatant admission to India s hand in the separatist movement and he Indian premier s speech is proof that his country is meddling in Balochistan. Moreover, Pakistan alleged that Indian agencies are backing Baloch insurgents and working to destabilize Pakistan. 26 China s Persuasion India s foreign secretary S Jaishankar made it clear that India has sovereignty issues with the CPEC corridor passing through POK. The fact is that the CPEC violates India s sovereignty because it runs through POK. The advice came from Chinese state media that India should join the China Pakistan Economic Corridor to reap economic benefits even if it means legitimizing the disputed region. The Global Times, a nationalistic, state-controlled tabloid said, New Delhi fears that the CPEC, passing through the Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, would serve the purpose of granting legitimacy to Pakistan s control over the region and by promoting the construction of the corridor, China intends to interfere in the Kashmir dispute. These concerns are unwarranted. 27 China has no intention of interfering in the territorial dispute between India and Pakistan. China has long believed that the two neighbours should solve their dispute through dialogue and consultations and it has repeatedly emphasized that China respects India s sovereignty concerns. Taking a strong stand on territorial issues is important, but it s hoped India could adopt an objective and more pragmatic attitude toward the One Belt, One Road proposal. It s estimated that the CPEC could pave the way for about 1 million new jobs and could attract a strong influx of foreign direct investment (FDI) into the region. India should seize the opportunity to alleviate misunderstandings with Pakistan through economic cooperation. 28 For both China and Pakistan, the primary goals of CPEC are economic. Kashgar is nearly three thousand miles from Shanghai by road. The CPEC provides western China with quicker access to sea and reduces the country s dependence on the Asia-Pacific sea lines of communication. For Pakistan, the Gwadar port reduces its dependence on its two major ports, both located in the greater Karachi area. It also provides a means to develop its most deprived areas and boost economic growth and efficiency in established industrial hubs World Focus July 2017

65 India s Surgical Strike The successful surgical strike conducted by the Indian Army across the Line of Control (LOC) on 29 September 2016, mark a definitive shift in India s Pakistan policy. In these circumstances, India s longstanding policy of engagement with Pakistan not only failed but in fact, encouraged it to continue with its involvement with terrorist activities directed against India. PM Modi s more muscular approach towards Pakistan constitutes a refreshing break from the past. This shift may be traced to the aftermath of the January 2016 Pathankot incident, when it became crystal clear that Pakistan had no intention to seriously address India s concerns in the matter and bring to book the perpetrators of that terrorist action despite all its assurances that it would do so. 30 PM Modi followed in the mould of his predecessors, and in particular Prime Minister Vajpayee, by extending the hand of friendship to Pakistan as most dramatically illustrated by his invitation to Nawaz Sharif for his inauguration and by his surprise goodwill visit to Lahore on the occasion of the latter s birthday on 25 December However, once it became apparent that Pakistan was not prepared on any account to shut down its infrastructure of terror and would continue its export of terror to India, the Modi government swiftly decided to change its policy and adopt a more robust approach towards Pakistan designed to impose pain upon it in order to compel it to change its ways. 31 India actively retaliated the second terrorist attack by Pakistan based Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM) on the Indian army base at Uri on September 18, Since the Uri attack, there was much speculation as to India s reaction. In terms of being offensive, India chose on September 28, 2016 to conduct surgical strikes into POK across the Line of Control. The targets were the launch pads of the terrorists. A surgical strike, unlike carpet bombing, is a limited but fast operation in military parlance to take out a specific target involving limited or no collateral damage. 32 The intention of such operations is to ensure that offensive actions do not escalate to war. These actions may be denied or sorted out diplomatically by the concerned government. The Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) of India who briefed the media after the strike across the Line of Control, he also pointed out that apart from significant causalities to the terrorists and their supporters, the operations have been completed as the goals were met. 33 On the other, the government of Pakistan has blatantly refused to acknowledge that the terrorists of the Uri attack belong to their nationality and that India has undertaken such a strike. Rather their Inter Services Public Relations confirmed it as cross border fire which has been a routine affair between both the countries. However, the security establishment in India knows that reaction from Islamabad has always been predictable and the current refusal suits New Delhi. In the meanwhile, to build credibility to its response to the surgical strike, the Pakistan government has indulged in a huge campaign in the POK that the strikes never occurred. 34 PM Modi s decision to order army raids across the Line of Control in Kashmir has got mixed response in India. Many supporters have greeted it as a long overdue step to challenge Pakistan s support to cross-border terrorism in India. Some people have seen the cross-loc attacks on terror launch pads as a dangerous move that could intensify the current conflict with Pakistan. Some have criticised it as yet another of the flip-flops that have characterised PM Modi s Pakistan policy. At the same time, PM Modi s advisers hinted that if Pakistan continues with its cross-border terrorism, Delhi will let the Indian Army cross the LOC in retaliation. 35 If terrorism continues in Kashmir, it is possible to imagine that the LOC will no longer be a thin military line of separation, but a zone of protracted conflict. Crossing the Line of Control was one element of Modi s policy to put pressure on the Pakistan Army to end cross border terrorism. PM Modi, however, appears to be betting that in such a game of destabilization he can do more damage to Pakistan, and that, this in turn might act as a deterrent. The boldest part of PM Modi s new approach has not been horizontal escalation, but in the more demanding vertical dimension. Therefore, the surgical strikes beyond the Line of Control by the Indian army demonstrated the will to intensify the conflict with Pakistan into a full blown military confrontation including its nuclear dimension. 36 The Challenges Ahead Scholars have raised many questions regarding Modi s policy towards POK, and the primary question is that, can the integration of POK with the rest of India will be a permanent solution to the Kashmir issue? When Strategic Shift in Modi s Pakistan Policy and PoK: The Challenges Ahead 65

66 we see the issue in its perspective on economic, social, political or technical lines, it becomes more and more clear that the Kashmir issue will not be resolved even if we secure POK. Merely acquiring 13,000 square kilo meters of land will certainly not help to resolve the cause of Kashmir. 37 As the great realist thinker of ancient India, known as Chanakya, said, a family can be sacrificed for the good of a village; a village can be sacrificed for the good of a country. India today with a population of 1.3 billion has an area of million sq km. acquiring a patch of land or the size of small districts and embracing all the violent after-effects, is likely not to bring a sensible solution. India devotes about 35 per cent of its annual budget to its defense and security personal in these areas. One of the main reasons for this is the ongoing conflict along the Line of Control in Kashmir. 38 If we believe that conquering this nest of militancy and violence will solve our inherited problem, then we are living in a fool s paradise. If India does indeed get back POK, we will end up spending 50 per cent of our budget on defense alone. Do we need this? And moreover, there are no safeguards to ensure that such a move will change into long-lasting peace. There will, of course, be arguments that integrating POK with Kashmir will lead to the development of the beautiful valley which has not seen much progress. In the last several decades, Pakistan has not shown any kind of interest in either peace talks with India or engaging with separatist movements in POK. 39 Earlier, former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee undertook the Samjhauta Bus journey to Lahore. We all know the outcome, the Kargil War. The Simla Pact, Agra Agreement, Lahore Declaration and other agreements remained just words. Will Pakistan allow for a quiet passage of POK to India? A permanent solution to the Kashmir and POK problem, which no one desires, can be war. Both India and Pakistan are nuclear nations. One can imagine the fallout and collateral damage a full-scale war will bring. We cannot afford to have generations of handicapped children, just to possess a piece of barren land. If a move is made to occupy the disputed land, the flames of terror in the neighbourhood will not only engulf POK, but will also come Kashmir. 40 In our struggle for POK, we may lose Kashmir as well. This will further strengthen the arguments of the separatists. If the entire Kashmir region demands separation from India, we will be giving away more than what we expect today. Keeping aside our emotions, if we think on political, logical and ethical grounds, it becomes apparent that gaining POK will not serve any purpose. Those who disagree may say that POK is an integral part of India and not regaining it would mean national embarrassment. 41 SD Muni argues that the real challenge of Modi s neighbourhood policy has always been in dealing with China and Pakistan. Both these relationships look as confused, uncertain and daunting as ever. PM Modi s foreign policy initiative of neighbourhood first seems to have run into troubled waters. There have been many successes when it comes to foreign policy in general but when it comes to the neighbourhood, the expectations aroused by the initiative and the energy invested in driving it have faded somewhat. 42 His continued engagement with Pakistan in the past three years yielded no results. The same Modi government heavily criticized by the Congress Party and stated that the BJP government would have more strength to handle Pakistan effectively. Not one inch of feel good factor can be claimed to have been developed with Pakistan under the policy of PM Modi s government. As a rising power, India has the strength to deal with any challenges, and therefore has to bear more responsibility than Pakistan to keep the region safe. The time has come to demonstrate this strength, and to fulfill these obligations of peace and security, the Modi government needs new policy directions to deal with Pakistan. 43 Furthermore, China and Pakistan relations are the best example of how greedy they are for money, power and supremacy can bring even opposite ideologies together. Pakistan is an Islamic Republic and China has no love lost for Islam. Still China and Pakistan are closest allies and mutual benefit involves pure economics. China is earning lots of money by exporting arms to Pakistan. Beijing is world s third largest arm exporter and as China s biggest buyer of arms credit goes to Pakistan. Both are trying their best to keep each other in good humour and eliminating terrorism is not on their agenda. One is the breeding ground of terrorists and other is using its international clout to save them. 44 Moreover, India s ties with Pakistan and China are as usual and there is no sign of hope to improve in near future, because both the countries are deliberately trying to undermine India s initiative to improve relations with these hostile countries. In this perspective, PM Modi s magic of India s foreign policy has failed with these two 66 World Focus July 2017

67 countries and he needs to be reviewed its foreign policy approach to deal with them. 45 well as the foreign policy of India at the regional as well as international level. Conclusion In fine, PM Modi made a big policy mistake in the beginning when he invited to attend Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in the oath taking ceremony in May 2014, while Nawaz Sharif took it as granted and did not reciprocate in the same spirit. PM Modi should have learnt from the past mistakes committed by the Congress Party or NDA government led by Atal Bihari Vajpayi, because, whenever, India tried to improve or restore relations with the hostile neighbor country, on his part, Pakistan has always stabbed in India s back. Chanakya said rightly, Learn from the mistakes of others You can t live long enough to make them all yourselves!!. But Pathankot and Uri terrorist attacks have brought a significant shift in Modi s Pakistan policy and equally opened the eyes of foreign policy makers in India to deal Islamabad in a pragmatic way. Subsequently, PM Modi openly supported the people of Baclochistan, which is a domestic affair of Pakistan, to put pressure on Islamabad to stop support terrorists activities against New Delhi. One can say for Modi Government that better late than never. Regarding the policy towards POK by the Modi government, there is no doubt that POK is an integral part of the state of the Jammu and Kashmir and it is a question of national honour to liberate it from the illegal Pakistani occupation for the Modi government. The growing China s presence in POK and the development of the CPEC project is a grave concern for India. But still Modi government has not prepared a solid plan for POK and what kind of policy India will adopt in future, because, POK is like a white elephant for India. Annexation of POK will not resolve the Kashmir problem, now the time has come to evolve a grand strategy to locate China and Pakistan in a broad framework. That is why; New Delhi has not join CPEC and OBOR projects led by the Republic of China and supported by Pakistan. This is a failure of the Modi government, because they have not pondered it seriously, the growing strategic partnership between China and Pakistan is a big challenge for Modi government in the coming years. Over all, we can say that PM Modi s charismatic style of leadership and powerful personality cult has raised the credit of New Delhi as End Notes: 1 Vlad%20Ghionaru_.pdf 2 Vlad%20Ghionaru_.pdf 3 Vlad%20Ghionaru_.pdf OccupiedKashmir.pdf 6 OccupiedKashmir.pdf 7 OccupiedKashmir.pdf _AditiMalhotra.pdf _AditiMalhotra.pdf Jammu-amp-Kashmir/article ece htt p:// socwp.html 28 rht16vsocwp.html neighbourhood/story- rrfk6poesz5igph9xfrorj.html 43 _k2&view=item&id=1672:the-failureof-prime-minister-narendra-modi-s-pakistan-policy&itemid= See Ahmad, Saleem (2016), India s Foreign Policy: Past, Present and Emerging Ties in theworld, World Focus, 443, November 2016, ISSN , Strategic Shift in Modi s Pakistan Policy and PoK: The Challenges Ahead 67

68 OBOR through PoK: A Threat to India s Foreign Policy Snehil Kacker Introduction In international relations there are no permanent allies, there are only permanent interests.this statement of the past, holds relevance till date. No country can afford to place international concerns and commitments above its own national interests. Realpolitik means business and business requires prudence. At present, the International scenario is undergoing tremendous changes, however what remains constant is the pre eminence of national interests. The Trump administration has already withdrawn from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in the name of protection of its national interests. Buy American, hire American is Trump s slogan to keep America first (Trump reiterated what Bush Sr, said in 1992 that the American Way of life is not for negotiation).this has resulted in a big opportunity for China, who along with India was constantly pressurised by the developed world to reduce its GHG emissions and stop benefitting from the status of a developing country. China is actively trying to dethrone USA as a Super Power and the withdrawal of USA from Paris Agreement would surely work in its favour to take a lead in the Climate Change negotiation. This is just an example to show how China is taking big strides to mould the global order in its own favour. In Europe, the Big Three in the form of Germany, Britain and France all also overburdened with their own problems, the recent crisis for Britain s Theresa May s being the loss of majority in the UK Parliament in the recently conducted snap elections. Undeterred yet mindful of such developments, China is aggressively moving ahead. It is not irresolute, indecisive and incapable. It has a big geo political strategy to lead the world and is efficiently taking the big and bold steps. The One Belt One Road (OBOR) Vision of China is a grand strategy to pursue its national interests in the name of a Vision for regional integration. The questions which arise from the above discussion are How the countries perceive OBOR? How India is going to tackle the threat of OBOR? Within the framework of OBOR what is the future of South Asia and South East Asia? India on its part is apprehensive of OBOR and its implementation. The main concern of India is the passage of OBOR through the POK. The paper will try to answer the above questions and will also discuss the OBOR Vision and its repercussions for India. It also highlights the effect of OBOR on South Asia and assesses the role of India in this extremely challenging situation. OBOR and China s Perspective The concept of OBOR is based on the revival of the ancient Silk route which connected China with Asia and ultimately with Europe. The two ancient silk routes were the Northern Silk Road and the Southern Maritime Silk Road. In 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping made an announcement to revive both of them. The new initiative is backed by modern railways and pipeline projects. The OBOR initiative has been bifurcated into two parts: 1. The Belt refers to the Silk Road Economic Belt a land based project aimed at connecting China with Central and Western Europe. 2. The Road refers to the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road a sea based project aimed at connecting China to South-East Asia, Africa and Central Asia. The OBOR is an attempt on the part of China to spread development and prosperity beyond its borders.it is aimed at regional co-operation, faster economic development and fostering new partnerships. Thus, it is a grand initiative to bring together all the countries along the route. Internally, it tries to rectify the lopsided development in China. The coastal and eastern parts of China are more developed in comparison to the inlands and the western parts. The belt initiative tries to put the inlands 68 World Focus July 2017

69 at the front of development and the Road puts the eastern opening up, so that there can be balanced development in China. Another good intention of the OBOR is that it aims at uplifting the economies of the emerging and developing economies that lie on the route. 1. This is the historic vision of China, if implemented it is going to be one of the most ambitious projects of the century. OBOR A Vision or a Strategy? China has portrayed OBOR as a win-win situation for itself as well as the countries in partnership. No wonder, more than 60 countries have already signed it. Nepal being the latest in South Asia to sign OBOR. Morgenthau in his second principle of the theory of realism states that, interest is always defined in terms of power. China, like any other country wants to be powerful. OBOR is not a vision of Xi Jinping to flourish China and other countries as well but it is a strategic move to control and assert its power in international politics. It is a systematic effort to dwarf India and establish its dominance not only in South East Asia but also in South Asia. OBOR challenges Europe and questions US supremacy. Xi Jinping has already declared OBOR as the most important decision of his foreign policy. It is bereft of any good motive of the statesman, rather it is a calculated move of China. The question which arises is that why India is opposing OBOR? India s concerns on OBOR It is projected that the Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB) will surely benefit India with its extended rail and road network. India will also benefit from the oil and gas network, pipelines and supportive infrastructure. However India is mainly concerned with the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which is a major component of SREB. The CPEC project passes through POK and particularly through the Gilgit Baltistan area which is close to India. India considers CPEC as an infringement of its sovereignty as it considers Gilgit Baltistan an integral part of India. This is the main concern of India regarding OBOR and CPEC. Thus India did not participate in the OBOR Summit held in China in May,2017. The project connects Kashgar in China to Gwadar port in Pakistan, through this port China can control Pakistan and come closer to India. The financial support of China to Pakistan runs in billions. Apart from this, China also plans to begin, by 2020, a hydropower project in Karot and hand it over to Pakistan. India has a strong presence in the Indian Ocean Region. The Indian Ocean Region also has the presence of several powers like US, Australia, Japan among others. The Maritime Silk Road (MSR) will give China a major presence in this region as well as in the South China Sea. India is already in collaboration with Japan, Australia and USA in this region. It does not want to diminish this strength by becoming a part of the Maritime Silk Road. It wants to maintain its crucial strength in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). 2. OBOR can push the countries involved in a financial crisis. India fears that the South Asian countries that are part of OBOR might face a debt crisis which will have a direct bearing on India. During times of conflict, the situation will become more complex. The CPEC passage through POK is an infringement of the sovereignty of India. This project will bring China as the third party to the Kashmir dispute. It is expected that China might change its stand from a silent spectator to an active participant in the so far bilateral issue between India and Pakistan. Pakistan is bound to follow China s wishes as it is already burdened with huge investments from China. It is also apprehended that Pakistan might be used by China which is keen to find a reliable regional partner in South Asia as an answer to the INDO- US policy. India wants OBOR to be based upon universal international norms, good governance, rules of law, transparency, openness and equality. These principles are not followed by China on OBOR, hence India opposes OBOR. During the recently convened SCO Summit, PM Modi stressed that connectivity projects in the region should respect Sovereignty, territorial integrity and maintain inclusivity and sustainability. India s response to OBOR India and themaritime Silk Road (MSR) India has tried to answer MSR through Project Mausam, Spice route and Cotton route. OBOR through PoK: A Threat to India s Foreign Policy 69

70 Project Mausam It is a project of the Ministry of culture. The nodal agency is Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi and the Research Unit is Indira Gandhi Centre for the Arts, New Delhi. The project has two levels-at the macro level it aims to establish cultural communication between the countries of the Indian Ocean Region and at the micro level it focuses on understanding the national cultures in their regional maritime milieu. It also aims for a nomination as a transnational inscription on the World Heritage List of UNESCO. 3. It is aimed at revival of cultural relations between the countries of the Indian Ocean Region. More than 35 countries are expected to be a part of this project. Spice Route This project aims to revive the ancient spice route of India which began from Kerala. The Kerala tourism is vigorously promoting it. The spice route links with Muziris Heritage Project, including the ancient port town of Kodungalloor in central Kerala which were the main centre of the spice trade with Europe and West Asia. It aims at the 31 countries enroute. UNESCO has also supported the project. 4. The project is more trade oriented than cultural. Cotton Route Revival of the ancient cotton route is also an attempt to counter MSR of China. It should be noted that Silk was not the only fabric that was exported from the east to the west. There are historical evidences to prove that cotton was also sent to central Asia via the silk road. India not only wants to revive this cotton route but through it, India wants to revive its relations with countries of this ancient route. 5. The revival of the above routes is a strategic move of India to counter the MSR. However, India is not swift enough to counter China. Project Mausam has not been moving at the desired pace because of the lack of co-ordination between the agencies involved in it. The officials have already missed the March, 2017 deadline to meet the targets. India s relation with the countries in the Indian Ocean Region: India & Sri-Lanka: In May, 2017, PM Modi visited Sri-Lanka and reiterated the cultural ties between the two countries. The Modi government has been closely supporting the Sirisena Government. The Sirisena government has turned down the Chinese offer to dock its submarine in the Hambantota port so as not to displease India. It should be noted that Sri Lanka is heavily indebted to China which has heavily invested in its ports especially the Hambantota and Colombo in the past few years. Sri-Lanka considers India as its brother and China as its friend. Both the brother and friend want to bring this island nation to its own side. Mauritius and Seychelles were also visited by PM Modi in 2015 as a move to strengthen India s position in the Indian Ocean Region. In May, 2017 Mauritius PM visited India. This was his first visit abroad since he took over as the Prime minister of Mauritius. Such visits and the consequent agreements hold a lot of significance to strengthen the position of India in the Indian Ocean Region and also send a strong signal to China. Although Sri Lanka has backed India s concern over OBOR, yet it also has to fulfil its own national interests, therefore it has supported China on OBOR. South China Sea and India South China Sea is a very significant area of interest and struggle among the adjacent countries as well as for the second stage actors in South China Sea. It is a storehouse of huge quantities of energy and seafood. The value and the volume of goods from this global trade route, Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC), has been estimated to surpass those of the SLOC of New York to Rotterdam(which has been the most prominent SLOC of the world for a century) The primary conflict of interests lie between China, Vietnam, Philippines among others. USA, Australia and India have their presence in this area. China has been vigorously spreading its influence in the South China Sea. 6. An economically, politically strong China is the best answer to the small, divisive countries surrounding the South China Sea. India too, has a good presence in these waters. It also maintains good relations with Vietnam. Sino Vietnam clashes and Sino Indian relations have been the prominent factor for the growing relations between Vietnam and India. India and Vietnam are sceptical of the aggressive moves of China in the South China Sea. China is also strongly influencing the neighbours of India. Military hardware is being supplied to Pakistan and Sri Lanka, 70 World Focus July 2017

71 economic and infrastructure aid has been given to Bangladesh and Military partnerships have been established with Nepal and Bhutan. These are no normal partnerships; rather they are a part of the strategy to encircle India with China friendly countries-the String of Pearls. As Brahma Chellaney has described Chinese policy towards India as Salami Slicing -the policy to make small incremental encroachments into the territory of India, which do not end up in war but give a strategic advantage to China. 7. China has been objecting India s presence in the South China Sea because it considers its sovereignty over the South China Sea. Therefore India is blamed for encroaching sovereignty of China. India has clearly stated that, it is free to explore oil in South China Sea, as per the Maritime International law and its intentions are purely commercial. India is not a party to the dispute in the South China Sea, also it is not a claimant in the dispute. The issue of Sovereignty is totally ignored by China, when it comes to the CPEC. The CPEC runs through those parts, which are claimed by India as an integral part of the Indian Territory. Thus China is encroaching upon the territory of India, thereby hurting the sovereignty of India. In turn, China declares this CPEC as purely commercial and aimed at providing livelihood projects to the region. This is just a tit for tat reply by China. It should be noted that the issue of South China and CPEC are different from each other. India is not a party to the dispute there, nor it intends to become a claimant to any island, but China has a historical record of claiming territory in the areas in which it invests. 8. CPEC is looked as an aggressive and expansionist attempt of China. Pakistan will certainly support such an attempt. Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and CPEC Jammu and Kashmir has a unique status in the Indian geopolitics. Kashmir, being the main point of tussle between India and Pakistan. It is equally important to know the reality of POK. The integration of the princely states in India was a herculean task. There were some states which were creating problem for the Indian government. Jammu and Kashmir being one of them. Maharaja Hari Singh was initially reluctant to join India. Meanwhile, Pakistani troops attacked this erstwhile state and under a lot of turmoil, Hari Singh, signed the Instrument of Accession in 1947.The Pakistan insurgency started taking the shape of a war. As a result in 1949, with the intervention of the UNO, a ceasefire line was decided. After 1971 war, with slight changes, it has become the Line of Control (LOC).Therefore, the portion to the north and west of the LOC is under Pakistan control. This is called Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK). 9. Moonis Raza tried to bring more clarity to POK. There is a misunderstanding that POK means a part of Kashmir is under the control of Pakistan. Pakistan has never occupied even a milimeter of Kashmir. The misunderstanding erupts from confusing two different geographical entities, one Kashmir and the other the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. The portion of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, illegally occupied by Pakistan is completely outside the territory of Kashmir. 10 The Pakistan administration first divided POK into Azad (Free) Kashmir (AK) and Northern Areas (NA) The Gilgit-Baltistan area of Jammu and Kashmir occupied by Pakistan covers 85,793 sq km. It was further divided in 1970 into two separate administrative divisions: Mirpur-Muzaffarabad (which Pakistan calls Azad Jammu and Kashmir, or AJK) and the Federally Administered Gilgit-Baltistan. Gilgit- Baltistan was earlier referred to as Northern Areas in Pakistan. Pakistan gave a large piece of land i.e. Shaksgam valley of 5180 sq km to China during its border agreement of 1963.With this agreement China has become an important player in this region. It has come really close to Indian borders. Since mid-1960s, China constructed the Karakoram Highway linking Kashghar in Xinjiang with Gilgit and Abbottabad through the Khunjerab Pass. Though it is a geographically sensitive area, China has continued to upgrade this highway and make it an axis of China s Silk Road Initiative which will link Xinjiang to Gwadar port in Balochistan through the highway, a possible railroad and oil and gas pipeline. China has invested in a number of projects in the Gilgit-Baltistan region and the Chinese connection is an important element of the region s economy. This is the reason India objects to the Chinese activity in the POK. It has equally objected to the elections in the Gilgit-Baltistan OBOR through PoK: A Threat to India s Foreign Policy 71

72 area. India considers the region of Gilgit-Baltistan as an integral part of India. 11. The Way Ahead China moves quickly, reacts quickly and acts sharply. It is able to do so because of the financial and political strength. A vast literature is available on the assessment of the rise of China. The Asian century has long been discussed in the foreign policy circles. With OBOR moving so fast and supported by a large number of the Asian countries, the questions which need to be addressed are where does India stand? Is there a possibility of an Asian Century? Is the Rise of China the diminution of India? Will India give a befitting reply to China? If India does so what will be the course of action? These can be the possible solutions to address the threat of OBOR- 1. CPEC passes through POK, which is illegally occupied by Pakistan. It is based on the rationale of the 1963 boundary agreement between Pakistan and China. India does not accept the legality of this agreement. Therefore the construction work of China in POK should be strongly opposed by India. 2. India should ask China to openly explain its position on the CPEC in the disputed territory of POK. If China infringes India s Sovereignty, India should increase its commercial ventures in the South China Sea, thereby mounting an indirect pressure on the so called Sovereignty of China in the South China Sea. 3. Gilgit and Baltistan should be cautiously and closely monitored. Even minor incidents should be taken up as warning signals. India should regularly include discussions on Gilgit-Baltistan and its activities in the International forums. 4. It is suggested that India should constantly explore to expand its road, railways and pipeline networks in South Asia as well as in Central Asia. The stalled projects should be immediately warmed up. A revamping of the procedures for clearances is required. A better co-ordination between the different ministries is the need of the hour. 5. India has leverage over China in its soft power. English, Yoga and software among others should be more vigorously spread in the world. India should attempt to make a strong appeal to the Chinese population, youth in particular. 6. India and Pakistan have become members of SCO. This might pressurize India to support some decisions backed by China in this forum. Therefore India has to tread cautiously before making commitments in SCO which might hamper its national interests. A strong, consistent and fast response to China is the only way to arrest this big dragon of the 21 century. If India moves in a business as usual speed it might be overtaken by China. The dragon is moving at a speed too fast to be ignored. The timely response of India will guarantee it the status of a Big Power which will no longer require China to chart the course of a century. References 1. Minghong, Yang Understanding the One Belt One Road Initiative : China s Perspective in (Eds)Kundu, Nivedita, Sharma,B.K. China s One Belt One Road: Initiative, Challenges and Prospects Vij Books India Pvt.Ltd, Panda,Jagannath India China relations:politics of Resources, Identity and Authority in a Multipolar World Order,Volume 32 of Routeledge Advances in South Asian Studies,Francis &Taylor,2016.pp economy/policy/india-plans-cotton-ancient-maritimeroutes-to-counter-chinas-ambitions/articleshow/ cms 6. (Eds)Fels, Enrico, Vu, Truong-Minh, Power Politics in Asia s contested Waters:Territorial disputes in the South China Sea Springer,2016,pp Ibid,pps Panda,Jagannath India China relations:politics of Resources, Identity and Authority in a Multipolar World Order,Volume 32 of Routeledge Advances in South Asian Studies,Francis &Taylor,2016,pp Jaffrelot,Christopher, Pakistan: Nationalism without a Nation Zed books,2002 pp (Eds) Kaul,Shyam&Kachru,Onkar, Jammu, Kashmir,Laddakh:Ringside Views,Atlantic Publishers and Dist.,1998,pp gilgitbaltistan-back-into-the-kashmir-equation/ 72 World Focus July 2017

73 Impact of Pak Occupied Kashmir on Indian Economy Dr. Aparna Banerjee The State of Jammu and Kashmir had long been a seat of political issue because of the conflict between India and Pakistan since Independence over the claims of territorial limits of Kashmir valley and its adjoining areas, popularly known as the Pak occupied Jammu and Kashmir region. This paper therefore attempts to analyse the economic performance of the State of Jammu and Kashmir in terms of the growth of industry, trade, tourism and employment generation under such political turmoil in recent globalization period. In doing so, the paper also have tried to explain how such cross border wars, mutual conflicts and skirmishes over the years have adversely affected the cross border trade specially, LOC trade and small scale industrial sector (other traditional specialized industries such as handicrafts, khadi and village industries, handlooms, horticulture, floriculture and sericulture etc.), for which once the state would had been boasted of. Introduction A territorial conflict primarily between India and Pakistan, popularly known as the Kashmir conflict had started just after the partition of India in 1947, with a minor role being played by China at times. India and Pakistan had so far fought three wars over Kashmir, namely, Indo-Pakistani Wars of 1947 and 1965 and Kargil War of The two countries have also been involved in several skirmishes over the control of the Siachen Glacier. India claims the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, and from 2010, administers approximately 43% of the region, controlling Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, Ladakh, and the Siachen Glacier. Pakistan administers approximately 37% of Jammu and Kashmir, namely Azad Kashmir and Gilgit- Baltistan. China currently administers Demchok district, the Shaksgam Valley, and the Aksai Chin region which has been disputed by India since China took Aksai Chin during the Sino-Indian War of The root of conflict is in Kashmir Valley between the Kashmiri insurgents and the Indian government based on the demand for a local autonomy and selfdetermination. Democratic development was limited in Kashmir until the late 1970s, and by 1988, many of the democratic reforms introduced by the Indian Government had been reversed. Non-violent channels for expressing discontent were thereafter limited and caused a dramatic increase in support for insurgents advocating violent secession from India. The year of 1984 saw a pronounced rise in terrorist violence in Kashmir. Post-1987 insurgency occurred in Indian administered Kashmir when a catalyst for the insurgency resulted in formation of armed insurgent groups. In July 1988 a series of demonstrations, strikes and attacks on the Indian Government began the Kashmir Insurgency with a total death of almost thousands of people as a result of the turmoil in Jammu and Kashmir. Protest movements created to voice Kashmir s disputes and grievances with the Indian government, specifically the Indian Military, being active in Jammu and Kashmir since In mid-1999, alleged insurgents and Pakistani soldiers from Pakistani Kashmir infiltrated Jammu and Kashmir with the start of 1999 Conflict in Kargil. During the winter season, Indian forces regularly move down to lower altitudes, as severe climatic conditions make it almost impossible for them to guard the high peaks near the Line of Control. This practice is followed by both India and Pakistan Army. The terrain makes it difficult for both sides to maintain a strict border control over Line of Control. The insurgents took advantage of this and occupied vacant mountain peaks in the Kargil range overlooking the highway in Indian Kashmir that connects Srinagar and Leh. By blocking the highway, they could cut off the only link between the Kashmir Valley and Ladakh. This resulted in a large-scale conflict between the Indian and Pakistani armies. The final stage involved major battles by Indian and Pakistani forces resulting in India recapturing most of the territories held by Pakistani forces. Fears of the Kargil War turning into a nuclear war provoked the then- United States President Bill Clinton to pressure Impact of Pak Occupied Kashmir on Indian Economy 73

74 Pakistan to retreat. The Pakistan Army withdrew their remaining troops from the area, thus ending the conflict. India regained control of the Kargil peaks, which they now patrol and monitor all year long. In 2000s Al-Qaeda and its affiliates seriously got involved in scenario in Pakistan-administered Kashmir with tacit approval of Pakistan s Inter- Services Intelligence agency (ISI) and organised a campaign of terror in Kashmir to provoke conflict between India and Pakistan. Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives in Pakistan-administered Kashmir also helped terrorists, already being trained in Afghanistan, to infiltrate Indian-administered Kashmir Kashmir Unrest The 2010 Kashmir unrest was a series of protests in the Muslim majority Kashmir Valley in Jammu and Kashmir which started in June 2010 and tensions remained till September The unrest erupted after alleged fake encounter of a local youth with security force. Next, thousands of youths, separatists and Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group pelted security forces with rocks, burned government offices and attacked railway stations and official vehicles in steadily intensifying violence. These protests involved the Quit Jammu Kashmir Movement launched by the Hurriyat Conference led by Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who had called for the complete demilitarisation of Jammu and Kashmir. October 2014 In October 2014, Indian and Pakistani troops traded gunfire over their border in the divided Himalayan region of Kashmir, killing at least four civilians and worsening tensions between the longtime rivals. The small-arms and mortar exchanges, which Indian officials called the worst violation of a 2003 ceasefire, left 18 civilians wounded in India and another three in Pakistan. Tens of thousands of people fled their homes on both sides after the violence erupted on 5 October. Moreover, it was found that nine civilians in Pakistan and seven in India were killed in consecutive three nights of fighting. According to Article 370 of Indian constitution, a special autonomous status was granted to the state of Jammu and Kashmir, as per Instrument of Accession which specifies that the State must concur in the application of laws by Indian parliament, except those that pertain to Communications, Defence and Foreign Affairs. Central Government could not exercise its power to interfere in any other areas of governance of the state. Kashmir s accession to India was provisional, and conditional on a plebiscite, and for this reason had a different constitutional status to other Indian states. In October 2015 Jammu and Kashmir High Court said that Article 370 is permanent and Jammu and Kashmir did not merge with India the way other princely states merged but retained special status and limited sovereignty under Indian constitution. July 2016 On 8 July 2016, a popular militant leader Burhan Muzaffar Wani was cornered by the security forces and killed. Following his death, protests and demonstrations had taken root, thus, leading to an amplified instability in the Kashmir valley. Curfews had been imposed in all 10 districts of Kashmir and over 40 civilians died and over 2000 injured in clashes with the police. More than 600 have pellet injuries, many of them may lose their eyesight. To prevent volatile rumours, cellphone and internet services had been blocked, and newspapers had also been restricted in many parts of the state. September 2016 An attack by four militants on an Indian Army base on 18 September 2016, also known as the 2016 Uri attack in Indian-ruled Kashmir, again created crossborder terrorism which resulted in the death of 19 soldiers as well as the militants themselves led by the militant group Jaish-e-Mohammed. On the Pakistani side, military alertness was raised and some Pakistan International Airlines flights were suspended. The political scenario can be shortly depicted under three phases with the nature of political brawl as discussed below: Indian Administered Jammu and Kashmir (i) Phase of Autonomy & Plebiscite Conundrum ( ) (ii) Phase of integration & Rise of Kashmiri Nationalism ( ) (iii) Rise of the separatist movement and Islamism ( ) 74 World Focus July 2017

75 Reasons behind the Dispute The Kashmir Conflict arose from the Partition of British India in 1947 into modern India and Pakistan. Both countries subsequently made claims to Kashmir, based on the history and religious affiliations of the Kashmiri people. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, which lies strategically in the north-west of the subcontinent bordering Afghanistan and China, was formerly ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh under the paramountcy of British India. In geographical and legal terms, the Maharaja could have joined either of the two new countries. Although urged by the Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, to determine the future of his state before the transfer of power took place, Singh demurred. In October 1947, incursions by Pakistan took place leading to a war, as a result of which the state of Jammu and Kashmir remains divided between India and Pakistan. Twothirds of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, comprising Jammu, the Kashmir Valley, and the sparsely populated Buddhist area of Ladakh are controlled by India while one-third is administered by Pakistan. The latter includes a narrow strip of land called Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas, comprising the Gilgit Agency, Baltistan, and the former kingdoms of Hunza and Nagar. Attempts to resolve the dispute through political discussions have been unsuccessful. In September 1965, war again broke out between Pakistan and India. The United Nations called for another cease-fire, and peace was restored following the Tashkent Declaration in 1966, by which both nations returned to their original positions along the demarcated line. After the 1971 war and the creation of independent Bangladesh under the terms of the 1972 Simla Agreement between Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan, it was agreed that neither country would seek to alter the cease-fire line in Kashmir, which was renamed as the Line of Control, unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Numerous violations of the Line of Control have occurred, including incursions by insurgents and Pakistani armed forces at Kargil leading to the Kargil war. There have also been sporadic clashes on the Siachen Glacier, where the Line of Control is not demarcated and both countries maintain forces at altitudes rising to 20,000 ft (6,100 m), with the Indian forces serving at higher altitudes. Cross-Border Troubles The border and the Line of Control separating Indian and Pakistani Kashmir passes through some exceptionally difficult terrain. The world s highest battleground, the Siachen Glacier, is a part of this difficult-to-man boundary. Even with 200,000 military personnel, India maintains that it is infeasible to place enough men to guard all sections of the border throughout the various seasons of the year. Pakistan has indirectly acquiesced its role in failing to prevent cross-border terrorism when it agreed to curb such activities after intense pressure from the Bush administration in mid-2002.the Government of Pakistan has repeatedly claimed that by constructing a fence along the line of control, India is violating the Shimla Accord. India claims the construction of the fence has helped decrease armed infiltration into Indian-administered Kashmir. Pakistan s relation with militants India has furnished documentary evidence to the United Nations that Pakistan supports Kashmiri militants, leading to a ban on some terrorist organisations, which Pakistan has yet to enforce. In 2009, the President of Pakistan Asif Zardari asserted at a conference in Islamabad that Pakistan had indeed created Islamic militant groups as a strategic tool for use in its geostrategic agenda and to attack Indian forces in Jammu and Kashmir. It has been found that that there is a clear connection between Pakistan s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and three major militant outfits operating in Jammu and K a s h m i r, L a s h k a r - e - T a y i b a, J a i s h - e - Mohammed and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. The militants are provided with weapons, training, advice and planning assistance in Punjab and Kashmir by the ISI which is coordinating the shipment of arms from the Pakistani side of Kashmir to the Indian side, where Muslim insurgents are waging a protracted war. Throughout the 1990s, the ISI maintained its relationship with extremist networks and militants that it had established during the Afghan war to utilise in its campaign against Indian forces in Kashmir. Joint Intelligence/North (JIN) has been accused of conducting operations in Jammu and Kashmir and also Afghanistan. The Joint Signal Intelligence Bureau (JSIB) provides communications support to groups in Kashmir. ISI acted as a kind of terrorist conveyor belt radicalising young men in the Madrassas of Pakistan and delivering them to training camps affiliated with or run by Al-Qaeda and Impact of Pak Occupied Kashmir on Indian Economy 75

76 from there moving them into Jammu and Kashmir to launch attacks. Almost about Rs. 24 million are paid out per month by the ISI to fund its activities in Jammu and Kashmir. Pro-Pakistani groups were favoured over other militant groups. Creation of six militant groups in Kashmir, which included Lashkar-e- Taiba (LeT), was aided by the ISI. ISI is still providing protection and help to LeT. The Pakistan Army and ISI also LeT volunteers to surreptitiously penetrate from Pakistan Administrated Kashmir to Jammu and Kashmir. So, several times it is found that Pakistan has been involved in training and arming underground militant groups to fight Indian forces in Kashmir. Economic Performance Growth of State GDP The state of Jammu & Kashmir with its varied and diversified geographic, agro-climate and topographic features poses peculiar and unique problems of development. Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) of Jammu & Kashmir state during (at current prices) has increased to Rs crores from Rs crores of , thereby, registering a growth of 14.93% during , finally with a tremendous jump to Rs. 132,307 crores in the year Despite the growth of state GDP over the decades in post globalization period, sluggish growth of various economic sectors such as horticulture, floriculture, sericulture, industrial sector, tourism sector, line of control trade, small scale industrial sector (such as handicrafts, handlooms, khadi and village industries), employment generation etc. have been found. This is mainly because of the continuous political turmoil between Pakistan and India over Pak occupied Jammu and Kashmir, which had poorly affected the entire economic condition of the state, thereby adversely affecting its production, industry, volumes and value of exports, imports and trade, foreign trade exchange earnings, together with the employment generation potential. Industrial Performance Rise of Industrial Sickness is almost a common phenomenon in the growth of industries, especially, those in small scale sector in the state of Jammu and Kashmir due to the continuous political unrest between India and Pakistan. Although the number of Small Scale Industrial units in the state has gone up, there are cases of sickness of units with some of them having become non-functional and others simply untraceable due to this constant political unrest. From the Census data of Status of Small Scale Industries (SSI Units), it is observed that almost units in the Census year have decreased to 5825 units in the Census year as the rest have become Closed/ untraceable Units. Moreover, from Table 1, a glance at Year-wise achievement under Small Scale Industries over the years shows that from to , there had been a sharp fall in all the cases i.e. lower number of registered units along with low employment generation and low Investment (Rs. in Crores) during the said period. Thus, Small Scale Industrial Sector had suffered a large set back in the globalisation period. Small Scale Industries Khadi & Village Industries Jammu and Kashmir Khadi and Village Industries Board, established in the year 1962, has played a vital role in generating employment for rural poor, unemployed youth and down-trodden artisans of the state by providing financial and technical assistance for setting of micro and small industrial production units under various schemes which come under the purview of All India Khadi and Village Industries Commission, Government of India. The main objective of Jammu and Kashmir Khadi and Village Industries Board, is to create employment opportunities in rural areas by promoting various Khadi and Village Industrial activities and to impart training to the rural artisans in various crafts. We saw an overall decreasing trend in production, sale and employment in Khadi industry from to Handicrafts Handicraft activities occupy an important position in the economic structure of Jammu and Kashmir State as they are best suited to the state, because of the following inherent characteristics. They are more environment friendly, more labour intensive and less capital intensive in nature, thereby, having greater scope for employment generation at a large scale. The Kashmir handicraft products have earned worldwide fame for their attractive designs, functional utility and high quality craftsmanship. In absence of 76 World Focus July 2017

77 other manufacturing industries in the state, handicrafts remained a key economic activity from time immemorial. The artistic imagination and craftsmanship of the Artisans reflected through a wide range of products, has delighted the connoisseurs world over for centuries. Crafts like Woollen Shawls, Crewel, Namdha, Chain Stitch, Wood Carving, Papier Machie, Costume Jewellery, Kani Shawls and the Carpets hold a significant share in the overall production and export of the State. Silken carpets in particular constitute a specialty having no parallel in quality and design at national level and, therefore, occupy an important position in the international market. The handicraft sector of the state also has great contribution towards foreign exchange earnings to the state and country in particular. We have seen also a sharp fall in the Exports of some items of Handicrafts Goods (Rs. in Crore) such as carpets, woollen shawls, papier machie and other items. Moreover, the value of production of woollen shawls had also declined from (Rs. in Crore) in to (Rs. in Crore) in Horticulture Sector Jammu & Kashmir State is well known for its horticultural produce both in India and abroad. The state offers good scope for cultivation of horticultural crops, covering a variety of temperate fruits like apple, pear, peach, plum, apricot, almond, cherry and sub tropical fruits like mango, guava, citrus litchi, phalsa and Berete. Besides, medicinal and aromatic plants, floriculture, mushroom, plantation crops and vegetables are cultivated in the state. Apart from this, well known spices like saffron and black Zeera are also cultivated in some pockets of the state. Horticulture is gaining momentum in the state as its contribution to GSDP remains around 7-8 percent over the past few years. Horticulture development is one of the thrust areas in the state which involves directly or indirectly many people associated with it, thereby resulting in the generation of higher incomes in the rural areas, thus improving the quality of life in villages. It is found also that the overall production of both dry and fresh fruits has been recorded to be decreasing largely from to Also, Export of fruit outside the State, and Import of fruits and vegetables have occupied a prominent place in trade of the State and have shown a decreasing trend over the years during to The Government is making all efforts to promote exports from Jammu and Kashmir State. State s fruit, especially dry fruits are also exported to other countries and in turn earns substantial foreign exchange. The Quantity of total dry fruits exported (in MTs) has decreased from in to in and the foreign exchange earned (in Rs. in crore) on horticulture produce has consecutively decreased from Rs crores in to Rs crores in Line of Control (LOC) Trade India s trade links with its neighbouring countries such as China, Central Asia and East Asian nations are centuries old as India believes in maintaining friendly relations with global world especially with neighbouring countries including Pakistan.Trade through Nathula Pass accounted for 80% of total cross border trade between India and its neighbouring countries in early 1900s. For maintaining cordial relation with Pakistan a number of initiatives have been taken to initiate peace process that could help resolve and address the political conflict between India and Pakistan besides normalizing bilateral relations and economic cooperation between the two nations for their mutual development and growth. Owing to proximity and socio-cultural and ethnic relations, various socio economic conditions, physical, political and environmental aspects of the neighbouring countries or borders, however, govern or decide the intensity, volume and nature of the cross-country or cross-border trade to develop the economic linkage and dependability automatically of two neighbouring countries or borders for the mutual benefit of the people of borders. Since partition of India, the events and policy trends have led to distances and created differences between India and Pakistan. Nevertheless in terms of history, culture, language and religions, both countries have number of common features. Jammu and Kashmir being at the terminal end of the country, along with poor connectivity, remoteness and other disadvantages, is one of the sensitive states. Opening of borders and bringing about economic integration Impact of Pak Occupied Kashmir on Indian Economy 77

78 with various regions of the state was very essential for stability, peace and prosperity. For achieving these objectives, India and Pakistan have developed mutually agreed Confidence Building Measures (CBM) - structures and agreements, undertaken by Govt. of India which includes Line of Control (LOC) Trade in Jammu and Kashmir State from the days of their independence. The present LOC trade is also the result of a series of CBMs during the past few years. The historic decision to start trade across the LOC in the divided Jammu and Kashmir was the outcome of a high level meeting between the Prime Minister of India and the President of Pakistan during April, 2005 to May 2 3, 2006 as a part of Confidence Building Measures (CBMs), where it was agreed that the Cross LOC trade would be by way of truck services; the list of items for trade would be identified; and the exchange of delegations between the Chambers of Commerce on both sides would be facilitated. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) pursued the main recommendations with the Government of Pakistan, whereas the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) pursued the issue of creation of the requisite infrastructure at the crossing points in Jammu and Kashmir to develop Land Customs Stations (now Trade Facilitation Centres), for Uri- Muzaffarabad Trade Route at Salamabad and for Poonch-Rawalkote Trade Route at Chakkan-da- Bagh, after identifying suitable land for the purpose. The quantity and value of Imports and Exports between the two countries in the years , and shows a sharp fall in Export and Import data of trade of Jammu and Kashmir to Pakistan, as LOC trade. Tourism Before the insurgency intensified in 1989, tourism formed an important part of the Kashmiri economy. The tourism economy in the Kashmir valley was worst hit due to the constant political unrest between India and Pakistan over hold of Pak occupied Kashmir region. Pilgrimage Tourists However, every year, thousands of Hindu pilgrims visit the holy shrines of Jammu and the Buddhist monasteries of Ladakh which continues to remain popular pilgrimage and tourism destinations. Of them the holy shrines of Vaishno Devi, located in the Trikuta Hills, and Amarnath, need special mention as they has significant impact on the state s economy, being the largest foreign exchange earners of lumpsum amount. It was estimated in 2007 that the Vaishno Devi yatra contributed ¹ 4.75 billion (US$74 million) to the local economy annually a few years ago. The contribution should be significantly greater now as the numbers of Indian visitors have increased considerably. But, foreign tourists have been slower to return. The British government still advises against all travel to Jammu and Kashmir with the exception of the cities of Jammu and Srinagar, travel between these two cities on the Jammu-Srinagar highway, and the region of Ladakh, while Canada excludes the entire region excepting Leh. Besides Kashmir, several areas in the Jammu region have a lot of tourist potential such as Bhau Fort in Jammu city is the major attraction for the tourists and Bage-e-Bahu is another local aquarium tourist destination, established by the State Fisheries Department. The state s recent increase in violence has adversely affected the economy by decreasing the number of tourist arrivals. Overview of Employment Scenario in J&K Unemployment is a social issue of serious concern at the present, both at National as well as State levels. But the state of Jammu and Kashmir, unlike most of the states of the country has been facing the problem of disguised unemployment, since the start of conflict between India and Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir. Census 2011 shows that 28.8% of the total workers are cultivators, 12.7% are agricultural labourers and the remaining 58.5% are workers engaged in other activities including household industries. Work opportunities, however, have not kept pace with the increasing population. The problem of unemployment gains more importance because of higher incidence of unemployment among the educated section of youth in the State. Almost 70% of the population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture and allied activities which continue to be a subsistence sector. However, it may be mentioned that near about 70% of the said marginal workers are associated with the agricultural and allied sector contributing very marginally to the total production, thus, giving rise to the disguised unemployment in agricultural sector. To avoid this situation, out of the said lakh of marginal workers, half of this 78 World Focus July 2017

79 working force suffers from disguised unemployment who can contribute positively on being shifted to the other sectors of economy without affecting the total agricultural production and yield productivity in the State. In the absence of desirable industrial growth and limited scope for absorption in the private sector, such decline in the disguised unemployment could not be possible; rather many have been rendered unemployed and have been found to have joined the ranks of job seekers. Conclusion It is found that the continuous threats to the outside world as posed by irregular, sudden conflicts, quarrels and even wars in the Pak occupied Kashmir region has marred the glorious history of India s trade and tourism route links with its neighbouring countries via the state of Jammu and Kashmir in northern India, together with its consequent adverse impact on both the entire economy of the state and overall India over the years, even in post globalisation period. However, recent Eco tourism workshops, under government initiatives first held in April 2011 in Jammu, followed by more in Leh and Srinagar to sensitize people may raise our hopes and expectations to increase more tourism and trade in Kashmir in the near future. References 1. Economic Survey, , Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Jammu & Kashmir, Government of Jammu & Kashmir. 2. Economic Survey, , Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Jammu & Kashmir, Government of Jammu & Kashmir. 3. Directorate of Horticulture (P&M), Jammu & Kashmir. 4. Agriculture Production Department, Jammu & Kashmir. 5. Statistical Abstract of India, 2012, Directorate of Economics & Statistics, New Delhi. 6. Census of India-Various Issues, PM Modi delivers hard message to Pakistan; refers to Gilgit, Balochistan and PoK in Independence Day 2016 speech Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his Independence Day 2016 speech raked up the issue of PoK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) and Balochistan, thanking people from these regions for their words of praise. By: FE Online Updated: August 16, :12 PM Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his Independence Day 2016 speech raked up the issue of PoK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) and Balochistan, thanking people from these regions for their words of praise. In the last few days, there have been talks of Gilgit, PoK and Balochistan. People from these places have expressed their gratitude and have thanked me. I am very grateful and thankful to them. I have never met them, they live far away, but the fact that they are appreciating me is a matter of respect for the people of India, the Prime Minister said. In his concluding remarks at the all-party meet on Jammu and Kashmir, PM Modi had said, the time has come when Pakistan shall have to answer to the world for the atrocities committed by it against people in Baluchistan and PoK. His remarks had been welcomed by people of Balochistan, who had thanked the Prime Minister for his concern. Modi s comments also come at a time when Gilgit- Baltistan is on fire after massive protests erupted against a crackdown by Pakistan s security forces. Gilgit-Baltistan is a part of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). In his Independence Day speech, PM Modi also spoke strongly against terrorism. This country will never bend before terrorism. More than 35,000 jawans have lost their lives fighting at the border so that we can stay peacefully here, he said. To the youth who have taken up gun, I urge them to return to their parents, shun violence. If we have to strengthen India s democracy, we must shun violence and embrace humanity, PM Modi said. (Courtesy: Impact of Pak Occupied Kashmir on Indian Economy 79

80 Terror Infrastructure in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: India s Security Concerns Dr. Prasanta Sahoo Introduction The Septermber 2016 surgical strikes conducted by India in the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) have once again highlighted the issue of terrorism in the region. PoK has become the hotbed of terrorism due to its massive terror infrastructure and widespread network across the border. Being close to the Line of Control (LoC), PoK has been used by Pakistan as the launchpad for terrorists intrude into the Indian Territory. India has impinged with Pakistan sponsor terrorism since a long time. The main motive of Pakistan is to destabilize Jammu & Kashmir (J&K). Pakistan s anger became double after the shameless defeat by Indian army in It was the first time under the able leadership of Prime Minster (PM) Narendra Modi, India reacted through the surgical strikes in PoK in the response to the terrorist attack on the Uri army camp in Kashmir on September Interestingly, Pakistan has been defeated by India in three wars since the independence in All of the wars were directly or indirectly related to Kashmir. In the past fifteen years, the two countries have been embroiled in four military crises. Furthermore, the West Waziristan, Pakistan s tribal region along the border areas of Afghanistan is well-known as the haven for terrorists. Daniel Byman also wrote that Pakistan is probably the most active sponsor of terrorism in the 21 st century. Pakistan s former ambassador to the U.S., Husain Haqqani, has accepted Pakistan sponsors terrorism, which was later confirmed by President Pervez Musharraf. PoK is a very different and unique region altogether. This is a land that Pakistan forcibly occupied and Punjabi-Urdu-Sharia domination imposed. It is proved that Pakistan has built massive terror infrastructure there creating a serious security problem for India. These terrorists are always on the move-on mode into India s side. The last couple of months, the Indian side of Kashmir has been going through violent protests and stone pelting by the misleading youth instigated and supported by the Pakistan army, ISI and terror groups. However, India has just started 80 World Focus July 2017 the operation to dismantle the formation of terror infrastructure across the LoC in PoK. History of Terrorism in India Being located in the center of South Asia, India has been prone to the attacks of cross-border terrorism. There is no country in the region not under the threat of terrorism. All the political leaders have one voice saying Pakistan is sponsoring and spreading terrorism in the region. It has claimed more lives in India than anywhere else in the region. Pakistan s main target is to disturb Kashmir, unstable it politically and ruin economically. Kashmir is the main reason for India- Pakistan military hostility, including three major wars they fought. During the 25 years of terrorism in the Valley, 43,000 people have been killed and over 850,000 have displaced. The aggression against Kashmir continues to be followed as a policy by Pakistan. By 1989, the terrorists started using sophisticated Chinese and the USA made weapons and extensive explosives provided by Pakistan. More than 20,000 Kashmiris have been trained and armed by Pakistan. In 1987, a disputed state election motivated for the insurgency/terrorism in Kashmir. India treats it as terrorism, while the separatists of Kashmir and Pakistan call it as a freedom struggle. As per the South Asia Terrorism Portal at present, there are more than six deadly terrorist groups along with Al-Qaeda and ISIS, active in the Kashmir region. History of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir After the document of accession signed between India and King Hari Singh, Indian forces landed in Kashmir and stalled the intrusion by Pakistanis. However, suddenly PM, Jawaharlal Nehru declared a unilateral ceasefire and took the issue to the United Nations (UN). The then Indian Army General, KM Cariappa requested to grant 24 hours of time so that Indian army can take control over the whole Kashmir but was denied by Nehru. Nearly half of the occupied

81 Kashmir was left with the illegal occupation of Pakistan. Earlier, Pakistan sent in about 12,000 Pathans to loot and plunder Kashmir. After taking the issue to the UN Security Council, the Indian leaders understood the real game of Western countries behind it. Later, the Kashmir controlled by Pakistan came to known as PoK with Muzaffarabad its capital and the part with India known as J&K. The territory of Kashmir has been divided as PoK, J&K, including Ladakh and areas such as Aksai Chin and Shaksam Valley. Three parts are under the control of three nuclear-power countries of the subcontinent, i.e. India, Pakistan and China. The territory also borders Pakistan s Punjab and Gilgit- Baltistan provinces to the south and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province to the west. The total area of the Kashmir region is 2.22 lakh sq kms, out of which approximately 35 percent that is about to sq kms is PoK. Existing Terror Networks and Infrastructure in PoK Terror training camps have been thriving in PoK for years. There are about 2,500 militants in various camps in PoK and actively supported by ISI and Pakistan army. As per the government sources, there exist of 42 militant camps, 25 in PoK and 17 in other parts of Pakistan. Headquarter of these organizations is based in Karachi but functions mainly through PoK. There are nearly 29 subversive groups functioning in J&K with one foot planted in PoK. The Indian Army claims, nearly 20,000 young Kashmiris have been trained and armed by Pakistan. On 3 rd January 2012, the army claimed that Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) was training a group of 21 women terrorists in PoK to infiltrate into India. These terrorists are trained by Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi at Muzaffarabad camp. Following surgical strikes, over 300 terrorists from Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), LeT and Hizbul Mujahideen flees from PoK camps. The recruitment camps in PoK exist between Muzaffarabad and Lahore. From here, the terrorists are sent to other camps to learn about arms, navigation and radio telephony. The recent surgical strikes wiped out eight terror launchpads. Sources say Pakistan pumped in around Rs. 100 crore to fuel terror in J&K. According to reports, the ISI has been sending the funds through Hizbul Mujahedeen chief Syed Salahuddin and Jamatud-Dawa (JuD) chief Hafiz Saeed. The money is spent on training, weapons and ammunition for Kashmir militants. Now there is a sharp rise in the recruitment of locals into militancy like Burhan Wani and Sabzar Bhat. Pakistan Sponsoring Terrorism Against India According to the author Daniel Byman, Pakistan is probably today s most active sponsor of terrorism. Despite this Pakistan has never been listed by the US State Department as a terrorist state. The former president of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf confirmed that his forces trained militant groups to fight India in J&K. He also accepted that ISI cultivated the Taliban after India has been regularly speaking that Pakistan has been involved in training and arming the local insurgent/militant groups in Kashmir. ISI has been funding all the terrorist groups. The FBI suggests from the Satellite imagery the existence of several terrorist camps in Pakistan. Pakistan is said to be a haven for these terrorist groups. The Kashmiri terrorists, including Saeed and Lakhvi, are heroes in Pakistan. Taliban, Haqqani, Osama Bin Laden and Zawahiri are ideals for many Pakistani youths. In the 2001, Pakistan helped evacuation of about 5000 top leadership of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan encircled by NATO forces. The LeT began carrying out operations in J&K in the 1990s itself. President Asif Ali Zardari had admitted in July 2010 that the militants had been deliberately created and nurtured by past governments. India s Security Concerns India is facing many problems on the border security measures. According to Prakash Singh, former Director General, Border Security Force (BSF), The level of security arrangements along a particular border would depend upon the political relations, the economic linkages and the ethno-religious ties between people across the borders. Pakistan and India have fought almost four wars, directly or indirectly linked to J&K. Direct accessibility and the porous nature of the borders allow insurgents groups tactical flexibility. Technological developments, quick passage of information and transfer of funds to terrorist groups have changed the perspective of border security. The militants giving military training to young Kashmiri Muslims and providing sophisticated weapons. The training is given by the Terror Infrastructure in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: India s Security Concerns 81

82 ISI, either directly or through religious fundamentalists and Jihad organizations located in PoK. The terrorist groups have also been trying to bitter the Hindu- Muslims cordial relationship within India. The JuD is an adherent to the principles of Sunni Wahhabism and seeks primarily to establish a Universal Islamic Caliphate in the lands that were once under Muslim rule. In an interview in 1999, Hafiz Saeed declared jihad and announced to break-up and completely dissolve India into Pakistan. India s Strategy to Dismantle Terror Infrastructure Top military officers believe short-term actions will not damage terrorists capabilities much. A determined and constant campaign is needed. As per India s military and intelligence assessment, PoK hosts over 40 terror training camps in PoK. There are also around 50 launchpads having the capability of hosting 2000 terrorists. Interestingly, these sites are fully protected by the Pakistan Army. The Army predicts, now Pakistan will attempt to push more terrorists to seek revenge of the surgical strikes. The surgical strike was a perfect blow to the terrorists. PM, Modi s statement on the Balochistan turmoil was the best strategy to curtail Pakistan s Kashmir rant. This has worked as an antidote which impact is already visible in Pakistan. G Parthasarathy strongly believes that India should exploit the Balochistan turmoil as much as possible. Scholars argue India should now internationalize the issue of PoK and Balochistan. India should convince the world body to force Pakistan over terrorism. After the 2016 Uri attack, India adopted a hard-soft cocktail strategy in dealing with Pakistan and terrorism. First, Delhi successfully used the diplomatic channel to isolate Pakistan and second, it used hard/military action to destroy the terror structures. India has announced: either Pakistan destroys the terror structures or Delhi will do it in its own way. Now Indian military requests a free hand to deal with the terror and Kashmir situation. Rajesh Rajagopalan observes that India needs an effective counterinsurgency strategy focusing on small-unit operations. Uri Attack and Surgical Strikes On 18 th September 2016, four heavily armed terrorists attacked an army camp in Uri in J&K. The attack killed 19 soldiers and left 19 seriously injured. The militant group JeM was involved in the planning and execution. That time the Kashmir Valley was at the center of unrest, which had already claimed 85 civilians killed and thousands injured in clashes with security forces. The reason for Kashmir unrest is the killing of Burhan Wani, a Kashmir militant leader. On 29 th September 2016, the Indian Army conducted its first ever surgical strikes against suspected militants in PoK. Indian Director General of Military Operations (DGMO), Ranbir Singh said that the army has completely destroyed seven terrorist launchpads and killed more than 40 deadliest terrorists. Earlier, it was observed that a large number of terrorists gathering along the LoC with the objective of crossing the border. In such a scenario surgical strikes were considered the best option. Furthermore, by limiting the strike to terrorist launchpads, India maintained the requisite balance between resolving to punish the terrorists and keeping a low military threshold as a responsible state. The strike achieved the intended impact within a short time frame as planned. 1. Political Challenges for India i). Internal Difficulties (a) Hypocrisy of Left-Liberals Burhan Wani s death in Kashmir by the security forces has once again opened up a huge debate between left-liberals and nationalists in the country. As per left-liberals Kashmir is a dispute and the plebiscite can effectively resolve it. Now, all the Kashmiri militants who are sponsored by Pakistan and their Jehadi outfits are freedom fighters for them. Nobody should forget the anti-india, slogan rose in JNU campus and in support of freedom for Kashmir. They also put forth a bizarre argument of victimization by the state through suppression of the peoples voice. And to get freedom from it, they have taken up the guns. They also argue the security forces violating the human rights of Kashmir people including of terrorists. They support terrorists and oppose the state action on them. They condemned the death of terrorists like Burhan Wani, Afzal Guru, Yakub Memon, Ishrat Jahan and much more. They leveled it as the mockery of Indian democracy and judicial system. They have also blamed PM, Modi, the Indian army and the Army Chief Bipin Rawat. They call Modi as Adolf Hitler, Indian Army as German Army and Rawat as General Dyer of British India. 82 World Focus July 2017

83 Unfortunately, the same groups don t argue in the support of the atrocity against Kashmir Pandits. They keep complete silence over the atrocities committed by the Pakistan army with people of PoK, Gilgit and Balochistan. They also pressurize the Indian government for peace-talk even when Pakistan openly admits it supports terrorists in Kashmir. (b) Trap by the Opposition Parties It seems the Opposition parties in India have made a trap for the Modi government on Kashmir problem. In India, Kashmir issue figures prominently on the agenda of foreign policy and national politics. The Congress Party views it has to be sorted out by a dialogue with involving Kashmiri separatists. The Congress party once believed that the problem must be solved by the UNSC. The BJP is of the opinion that the Kashmir issue should not be politicized. The party opines that due to the faulty policy formulation by previous governments, the Kashmir problem amplified. The CPI(M) has also criticized the Congress government for not taking adequate political initiatives to resolve Kashmir issue. However, political parties have expressed unanimity on the issue of terrorism. Sheikh Abdullah also called a few Opposition leaders at his Delhi residence. Though, Opposition parties have assured cooperation for the government s efforts to restore peace. Sitaram Yechury, of CPI(M) said: The government must start the dialogue process with all stakeholders in the Kashmir Valley. Arvind Kejriwal, Sanjay Nirupam, Sitaram Yechuri, P Chidambaram, Digvijay Singh and many other opposition leaders claimed for the authenticity of the Surgical Strike. (c) Hurriyat and Pakistan Sympathizers It is said that there are more Hurriyat supporters in India than in Pakistan. It has been seen most opposition leaders, noted writers, actors and many academicians have been advocating for inclusion of Hurriyat in the peace talks on Kashmir problem. In reality, the All Parties Hurriyat Conference is a platform of the separatists and insurgents in Kashmir. The Hurriyat was formed on 31 st July 1993 by the replacement of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) proindependence ideology by pro-pakistan, ISIsupported, imported terrorist outfits. There are other beliefs that the Hurriyat is a creation of the US strategic interests in Kashmir and sponsored by a Washington-based think-tank. According to the Hurriyat Conference, Kashmir is an unfinished agenda of Partition. The Hurriyat Conference perceives itself as the sole representative of the Kashmiri people. Pakistan has been openly supporting Hurriyats. A three-member delegation from the Pakistan High Commission led by Abdul Basit met Hurriyat leader Syed Shah Geelani at his Malviya Nagar, New Delhi, residence in March 2015 and assured Geelani of full support. Recently, an India Today special investigation team caught top Kashmiri separatists on camera admitting received funds from Pakistan. ii). External Conspiracy (a) Too Smart America Since the independence, America stood oppose to India for its leading role in the Non-Alignment Movement (NAM). Simultaneously, it supported Pakistan for becoming its Cold War ally. When the Kashmir issue came up in the UNSC, US immediately favoured Pakistan. Even there was a period when America was directly involved in the Kashmir matter. While for US and Pakistan, Kashmir is an unfinished matter product of partition politics, for India, it arose because of Islamabad s aggression. As a result, Kashmir issue continued to vitiate the relations between India and the US. The US continues to seek a role in the Kashmir issue directly or indirectly. In 1953, Sheikh Abdullah meeting with a former US presidential candidate sparked tension between India and the US. It was believed that Abdullah was conspiring with the Americans for their support for the independence of Kashmir in exchange for military base facilities in the state. In the 1965 India-Pakistan war the US attitude was clearly pro-pakistan. The same was seen during the Bangladesh liberation war in In 1993 President Bill Clinton supported Pakistan s allegation over the human rights violation in Kashmir. However, the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America have changed the US policy in favour of Delhi forever. (b) Chinese Cunningness During the UNGA meeting, on 22 nd September 2016, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said his country would stand with Pakistan and will speak for it at every forum. He said the international community should have a better understanding of Pakistan s position on Terror Infrastructure in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: India s Security Concerns 83

84 Kashmir. He called Pakistan and China are iron brothers. On 17 th March 2017, Chinese Foreign Ministry said that development of CPEC will not change China s stance on Kashmir issue. China believes Kashmir is a leftover issue from history between India and Pakistan. However, on 18 th April 2017, China invited India to participate in the Belt and Road connectivity initiative. However, on 8 th February 2017, China blocked a US-India proposed ban on JeM chief Masood Azhar as a global terrorist in the UNSC. In 2004, China denied a member of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) but the same year gained NSG membership. Recently, China opposed to the US backed India s membership to the 48-member NSG club. Surprisingly, China and Russia have supported India s life membership in the Shanghai Cooperation (2017). In recent years, China and India have extended their relations through bilateral economic ties. (c) Silent Mission of Russia Nowadays, Russia s growing closeness to Pakistan has made India confused and worry. Immediately, after the Uri attack, Russia announced its first ever joint military exercise with Pakistan army shocked India. The Russian Army confirmed that The opening ceremony of the Friendship 2016 drills will take place in Gilgit-Baltistan. This wasn t good news for India because Gilgit-Baltistan was part of the erstwhile J&K state. For Pakistan, it was a big diplomatic win. Furthermore, over the last couple of years, Russia has attempted to expand its relationship with Pakistan. Pakistan and Russia are in the process of finalizing a huge military deal. Recently, both the countries signed an agreement for the construction of a 1,100-kilometer gas pipeline from Lahore to Karachi. Possibly, the new geostrategic environment in South Asia demands Russia to extend its diplomatic, security and economic outreach. Russia is trying to find new markets for its arms industry. Interestingly, Russia is now taking a new approach toward South Asia. 2. Security Challenges India has to keep in mind some security and military implications out of any adventure against Pakistan without having calculated properly and strategically. (a) Weak and Fragile but Nuclear Country Pakistan is one of the world s fragile and economically deprived countries of the world. It does not have parity with the fast-growing India. However, it has been constantly trying to make parity with India, through allying with China and having nuclear weapons. It seems Pakistan has made the nuclear weapon as a well-thought blackmail strategy against India. The threat of use of nuclear weapons by Jihadis has been another concern for the international community. In February 2016, Hillary Clinton, while talking to the New York Times, stated: Pakistan is running full speed to develop tactical nukes in their continuing hostility with India. Furthermore, the irresponsible statement given by the Pakistan Defence Minister on the use of Tactical Nuclear Weapons in the time of need has ringed the alarm bell for the international community. India had been blackmailed into accepting Pakistan s threat of use of Tactical Nuclear Weapons. Historically, Pakistan has successfully manipulated its nuclear weapons status to thwart India from taking tough actions. Now the PM, Modi is seeking a diplomatic-military mixed retaliation. (b) Non-NATO Strategic Ally Pakistan joined the Western military alliance system during the Cold War. In 2004, Pakistan had given the status of a major non-nato ally of the United States. This special status had given for its cooperation towards the US initiated War on Terror. The parties to NATO believe an attack on any one of them as an attack against all and together assist those attacked by taking actions. The US took advantage of the situation Pakistan was going through; its economic difficulties and enmity with India. The first Pakistan- US military Pact was concluded in This incident which changed the face of global politics turned out to be a blessing in disguise for Pakistan. Pakistan is one of the major recipients of US aid programmes. The status also provides the benefit of close military proximity between their defence forces. India s first reaction to the announcement was of surprise and condemnation. (c) Closeness to China China-Pakistan relations are very old going on since Pakistan s closeness to China has so much security and economic implications for India, which Delhi must not undermine. India defeated Pakistan 84 World Focus July 2017

85 in three wars but badly lost to China in China sees India as its rival in South Asia as well as in Asia in the near future. Beijing has taken advantage of the India-Pakistan traditional enmity. In the present situation particularly after US-India strategic partnership, China has shown extra closeness to Pakistan. Meanwhile, India is facing a massive security threat from the growing China-Pakistan nexus. In the 1960s and 1970s, China supported the Northeastern insurgents and this can happen once again. Likewise, China has taken a relatively evenhanded approach on Kashmir by recognizing it to be a bilateral dispute. More alarmingly, the Chinese are proposing building roads and pipeline projects in Gilgit and PoK. In addition, China s road belt initiative One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative is surely going to be threat India s interests in the region. (d) Late Move by Russia Nowadays, Russia, well-known for India s best friend, is trying to play a strategic game allying with Pakistan. The Indian thinkers are in great difficulty to understand Russia s this sudden and suspicious move. Russia is simultaneously appreciating India for its stance on terrorism, while conducting a joint-military exercise with Pakistan. Definitely, Russia has started a late but very powerful game, looking at the growing US-India strategic partnership. As the US-India embrace tightens, Pakistan and Russia are bolstering ties with one another. This cooperation goes beyond military sales. Very soon the two countries will also boost economic and energy cooperation. Now it is clear, not all is going to be well between India and Russia. Possibly, Russia may have also colluded with China to obstruct India s path to permanent membership in the UNSC. Scholars now predict of a possible China-Pakistan-Russia strategic alliance. Now India is compelled to accept Russia has changed strategy in its neighbourhood. In a rare situation, there would be two opposing strategic partnerships in making Russia-Pakistan-China and USA-India. Positive Factors for India (a) Anti-Pakistan Protest in PoK, Gilgit and Balochistan The last couple of years, strong anti-pakistan nationalist protests have been growing in PoK, Gilgit- Baltistan and Balochistan. They have been opposing the atrocity at the hands of Pakistani security forces. Exiled Baloch leaders and activists are taking part in protest rallies against Pakistan and China for constructing the CPEC. The protest rallies organized by Free Balochistan Movement (FBM) and led by exiled Baloch leaders. They organized weeklong protests outside the Chinese Embassy in London. The Baloch are determined to resist the China and Pakistan nexus. Protesters alleged that Pakistan is perpetrating massive human rights abuses to crush the political aspirations of the people of Gilgit. Recently, a dozen of exiled Baloch activists in Germany came out to chant anti-pakistan protests and loud Indian PM, Modi. Many of the Baloch activists were flying the Indian flag and shouting pro- Modi slogans. Baloch leaders have warned Islamabad of serious repercussions if they declare Gilgit- Baltistan as their fifth province. (b) USA-India Strategic Partners Now, United States declare its commitments to assist India in emerging as a new major power. The current India-US rapprochement has been termed as irreversible and is known as Strategic Partnership. India has now adapted to new global realities and changed its policies, alliances and roles in international politics. India-US relations were further strengthened by a meeting between Indian PM, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and US President Georg Bush in November The India-US Strategic Partnership advanced more in and the United States declared India as a key player in enhancing US role as a major power. The surprise move by Barack Obama supporting India s bid for a permanent seat in UNSC has further strengthened the partnership. Other initiatives include Next Step in Strategic Partnership (NSSP) of 2004, Defence Framework Agreement of 2005 and the 2008 Civil Nuclear Cooperation. President Donald Trump s phone call on 25 th January 2017 to PM, Modi simply confirmed the perception that the India-US relationship has reached a higher stage. (c) Russia-India Always Friends India has fought a lot of wars in just 70 years of its independence, mostly with Pakistan. In all the wars, Pakistan was helped by the USA, China, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. Except Russia, no country has ever come forward to help India. At the time of the Cold War, the Soviet Block included Terror Infrastructure in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: India s Security Concerns 85

86 Eastern European countries and to a high degree India. India, officially remained neutral. Russia finds in India an ally with a population of 1.2 billion people, which gives it a strong standing in front of Western Countries and a huge export market. India also has benefited from Russia s sharing of weapons, technology training of intelligence personnel and support in covert operations. During the recent sanctions against Russia by the West, India has again come to aid the country in need. It was Russia, which in the aftermath of 1998 nuclear tests, stood by India. These remarks have been followed by a high amount of technology transfer from Russia to India. Modi also reiterated strong support for India s NSG membership and for Delhi s entry as a life member in SCO summit in (d) Growing India-China Rapprochement Though India and China are rivals since 1962 and New Delhi was badly defeated by Beijing, still the last couple of years, both have tried their best to come closer. Both have shown to forget their past enmity and become good neighbours. China and India have seriously increased their bilateral relations through economic and security cooperations. Recently (June 2017) PM, Modi in the occasion of India s becoming the life member of the SCO had appreciated China for its support. He said in spite of a long-time border dispute between two countries, China and India never fire at each other. The current India-China bilateral trade is more than $65 billion. China has categorically said its CPEC project has nothing to do with the Kashmir Dispute. China had invited India to join OBOR initiative. Today, both the countries realizes to grow bilateral relations and friendship rather than a rival with each other. Though there is some rivalry going on between the two countries relating to South Asia and also the South China Sea. Relating to Kashmir, Beijing has already said it has no intention to mediate, leaves Pakistan completely shocked and lonely. India-Pakistan Military Standoffs Since the independence, India and Pakistan have had military standoffs many occasions. The most recent are at the time of the Kargil conflict in 1999, the Parliament attack in 2001, the J&K Legislative Assembly attack in 2002 and the Uri attack in These military standoffs resulted in the mass mobilization of troops on both sides of the border. In late December 2001, both countries moved ballistic missiles closer to their border and mortar and artillery fire was reported in Kashmir. By January 2002, India had mobilized around 500,000 troops and three armoured divisions on the Pakistan s border, which was equally responded by Pakistan with 300,000 troops. The standoff caused several casualties with 789 to 1,874 Indian soldiers died. There is always a fear of nuclear war between the two. According to Global Firepower Index, Pakistan ranks as the 13 th most powerful military in the world while India at fourth. India has 1.3 million active military personnel, while Pakistan has only 620,000. But Islamabad has ties with China. Diplomatic Isolation of Pakistan When most of the powerful countries were shy to support India s action against Pakistan, the neighbours came forward in solidarity. This was again seen at the time of the recent Islamabad SAARC Summit, which was cancelled due to India s diplomacy. Every member states followed India and pulled out of the summit opposing Pakistan supporting of cross-border terrorism. The PM announced that India has completely isolated Pakistan in the neighbourhood. Every nation of South Asia has condemned the barbaric attacks on the Indian army by Pakistani terrorists. Furthermore, the Bollywood banned Pakistani actors; BCCI stopped playing bilateral cricket series and requested ICC not to group Indian- Pakistan cricket teams together. Badminton Association of India decided to boycott the Pakistan International Series. India had also summoned Pakistan high commissioner Abdul Basit and handed over evidence of Uri attack. New Approaches Required There are brainstorms going on to find out some new approaches to solving the Kashmir problem. In 1998, the government changed its strategy from strictly military operations to humanitarian like Operations. But Rajesh Rajagopalan observes that New Delhi must reevaluate its counterinsurgency strategy in Kashmir. The approach demands a combination of military and political measures. The political approach means creating an atmosphere so that the common people of Kashmir can fully participate in the developmental and decision-making process in the 86 World Focus July 2017

87 state. Democracy must be the guiding principle and people must respect the Indian Union. This perceived alienation between people and the state provides fertile ground for terrorists. The state government should regularly engage with local people, make larger investments in education, provide jobs, and increase employment. New Delhi should heavily invest in the power sector, fruit processing and timber industries. New Delhi must fight the terrorist groups with the strongest force. On 15 th August 2016, PM, Modi rightly highlighted Pakistan s barbaric acts in PoK, Gilgit and Balochistan. Also, the issues of Article- 370 and the AFSPA should be revised thoroughly. Stating PoK as an integral part of India, Modi said to include the people of PoK in the future peace-talks. Conclusion India s military action against terrorists in PoK in the aftermath of the Uri Terror attack has been commended and supported by the international community. A top European Parliament official has said on October 2016, New Delhi deserves global support in its fight against terror. The surgical strike was probably a first military retaliation by India. The United States has for the first time publicly warned Pakistan that it will not hesitate to destroy terrorist networks existing in Pakistan and supported by its Army. In the pursuance of the major power status, India should habituate to become self-reliant and self-confident. No countries actually want to mess around the issue of terrorism, unless and until it hits them. Even America talks on terrorism only from its own perspective. The surgical strike has the greatest ever impact on the Pakistani establishment, both government and army. India needs to conduct such strikes on a regular basis and keep convincing the international community simultaneously. India s strategy of isolating Pakistan has worked successfully. India needs to keep exposing Pakistan regionally and globally. The message on PoK underscores that the Modi government will not compromise with the national security. The Indian army needs a mixed humanitarian and military action approach to stop terrorism and establish peace J&K. The ongoing violence has already destroyed property and livelihood worth millions in the valley. It is also becoming difficult to stop the Kashmir youths from becoming radicals. The religious fundamentalists are becoming stronger every day. The only way to make everything all right is to destroy the terror infrastructure and network existing in the PoK region with wasting no time. Entire Kashmir, including PoK, is part of India, says Mohan Bhagwat on RSS foundation day ABP News Bureau Last Updated: 11 Oct :06 AM New Delhi: Entire Kashmir, including PoK, is part of India and enemies of the country will face the heat said Mohan Bhagwat on Tuesday while addressing a rally on the occasion of Vijayadashami and the Sthapana Diwas (foundation day) of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Entire Kashmir, including PoK, is part of India, Bhagwat said in Nashik and added, Enemies of the country will face the heat. This time Vijayadashami is special. Country is progressing gradually, he said while indirectly praising PM Narendra Modi led BJP government. Meanwhile, Modi on Tuesday also complimented the works of the Rashtriya Swayamsewaka Sangh (RSS) on its 91st foundation day. On the Sthapana Diwas of the RSS, my greetings to all swayamsevaks and best wishes in their endeavours to serve our nation, Modi tweeted. Mohan Bhagwat also raised the issue of Kashmiri Pandits and said they must be given justice. He also stressed that, There must not be atrocities in the name of caste, religion. In early morning, RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat took part in the route march by RSS cadres on the occasion of Vijayadashami. However, this time, the traditional Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Vijayadashami rally had some changes. The new RSS uniform, white shirt and dark brown full-pants, debuted at the event. Union Minister Nitin Gadkari and Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis also took part in the function. In September 1925, the RSS was launched by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar and its foundation day is celebrated annually on Dussehra day. (Courtesy: Terror Infrastructure in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: India s Security Concerns 87

88 Pak-Occupied Kashmir and India: Can China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) resolve this problem? Dr. Pitam Ghosh A brief historical background of PoK: Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) consists of the so called Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit- Baltistan (referred to as the Northern Areas till August 2009). PoK is part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), and hence an integral part of India. It has been under the illegitimate control of Pakistan since October 22, 1947 when tribal lashkars supported by Pakistan invaded the princely state of J&K and soon afterwards the ruler of the state acceded to India. India succeeded in repulsing the invaders from the valley; but, when the Indian army sought to clear the state of these lashkars, it was confronted with regulars from the Pakistan army. The matter was referred by India to the United Nations in the hope of a fair and legitimate solution, which would put an end to external aggression and armed confrontation between the two states. In the subsequent period, Indian hopes of fair play were shattered when some of the major powers in the UN Security Council sought to equate an aggressor state (Pakistan) with the victim of aggression (India). The UN proposals of April 21, 1948 and August 13, 1948 were diluted considerably by March 14, 1949, clearly disregarding the Indian viewpoint. From this time onward, India took exception to the approach taken by the Security Council on the Kashmir issue. It felt that it could never expect justice from the UN body in the prevailing climate of Cold War rivalry. India went ahead with its policy of ascertaining the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir through democratic means. In September 1951, the people of Jammu and Kashmir elected a Constituent Assembly (interestingly, all the members were elected unopposed) which went on to ratify accession of the state to India on February 15, Finally, the assembly drafted a constitution for the state which was adopted on November 17, 1956 and came into force subsequently on January 26, Contrary to the adverse position taken by the UN Security Council on this process, vide its resolutions of January 24, 1957, India held it as free, fair, democratic and legitimate, and regarded the UN resolutions (related to troops pull out and holding of plebiscite) irrelevant and inoperative in view of the prolonged Pakistani non-compliance of the UN resolutions. In sum, one part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir continues to be under illegal occupation of Pakistan while the other part remains with India after accession. India has continued to maintain that PoK is a legitimate part of the Indian Union. Present Scenario: The euphoric sense of vindication, especially as India had managed to secure primacy for terrorism over Kashmir in the Ufa statement, i.e., no talks without action on terror by Pakistan, stands somewhat diluted. India-Pakistan ties witnessed significant momentum at the cusp of The intense political elation generated by Prime Minister Modi s visit to Lahore got quickly dissipated by the Pathankot attack. Despite the visit of the Pakistan JIT (Joint Investigation Team), India has raised the ante against Jaish-e-Mohammed and its chief, Masood Azhar. The subsequent arrest of an alleged Indian RAW agent by Pakistan, which has accused him of brewing trouble in restive Balochistan, is perceived as an attempt to neutralize India s growing demand for tangible action against terror. Coinciding with that, Pakistan raising the Kashmir bogey once again has pushed negotiations back to square one. Pakistan s Kashmir gambit is neither new nor surprising. Un-substantive as it is, it nevertheless adds some energy to the mostly bound-to-fizzle media frenzy in both countries, resulting in exchange of statements and counters from both sides. Pakistan s core strategy each time it brings up the Kashmir issue has been to put India on the defensive. Perceptibly, India has been portrayed as looking edgy each time the Kashmir card is played by Pakistan. But the fact remains that the basic contention between the two countries lies in the order of priority in which negotiations are carried out India wants terrorism to be 88 World Focus July 2017

89 discussed in a substantive manner ahead of other issues, while Pakistan unfailingly raises Kashmir as the core issue. In this context, certain concrete and viable options need to be explored and tested by India to blunt Pakistan s propaganda, vital among which could be raising the issue of Pakistanoccupied Kashmir (PoK) in an assertive manner.. By doing so, India will be adhering to its official stance on PoK governed by the Parliamentary resolution of Whether India likes it not, Pakistan will never forgo an opportunity to rake up the Kashmir issue, bilaterally or otherwise. Hence, parallel to supporting the dialogue and peace process, it is imperative that that India thinks in terms of formulating an alternate strategy a plan B. Cartography might lie, but topography and cultural geography does not. Kashmir is not India. Kashmir is not Pakistan. Kashmir is not China. Kashmir is the boundary zone of India-China- Pakistan. But it is distinctively Kashmir. And its people whatever their religion or national identity are Kashmiris. In the guise of crude nationalist narratives peddled by the surrounding post-colonial states for internal politicking and international leverage, their history is being stolen from the Kashmiri people. Wherever in Kashmir they are, their options boil down to bullets or ballots bullets if they protest being coopted into the big country which is not their homeland, and ballots if they agree to being co-opted into the big country which is not their homeland. How can a Kashmiri live under this perpetual erasure of his or her identity? The same way that every colonised people has survived through the ages: by interpretation and by insurrection. Interpretations enable a reunderstanding of the identity choices available to a person, and insurrections allow a collectivity to challenge unjust dominance by force. China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: An economic corridor is the Big-bang Shocktherapy which involves the availability of economic resources for creating the new economic opportunities for the people of the connected and surrounding countries rather links them into one transnational entity and their mutual relevance increases. A strong economic and human interaction among the countries is going to be a major strength for any country in the near future. Two Asian economies have joined hands to form an Economic Corridor which is known as China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to achieve their shared objective of mutual growth. China has decided to undertake a large scale foreign investment undertaking which will ensure that China stays at the forefront of globalization, international trade and economic growth. The Chinese President pledged an additional $113 billion to the entire OBOR(One Belt One Road) initiative. The proposed corridor impacts relations between India and Pakistan, as it passes through the Gilgit Baltistan area of Jammu and Kashmir. No doubt that there are conflicts between India and Pakistan, but when the people of both sides will be engaged in economic activities and progress, this could completely minimize the conflict and stakeholders some time may think over the peace of both the regions. This would be rather a step towards the commercialization of LOC Trade.(1) Significance and Implications of CPEC: India needs to grasp the motivation, significance and implications of this new China-Pakistan nexus. First, CPEC implies a further deepening of the Sino-Pak alignment which began to intensify after the Osama Bin Laden episode. Moving from all-weather friendship to iron brother status, China began to liken its ties with Pakistan to the US links with Israel. Xi Jinping considers Pakistan as a frontline state in the war against terror and is of the view that its sacrifices can t be forgotten by China. China expects the CPEC to yield far-reaching economic benefits, and regional security is instrumental for this purpose. Secondly, and related to this, is the strategic intent of besieging India. The alignment of Karakoram (land) with Gwadar (sea), both having commercial and military utility, could serve as strategic chokepoints vis-à-vis India. As Andrew Small notes in his book The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia s New Geopolitics, Pakistan is both a Chinese pawn (against India) and platform for power projection..a long history of secret deals between their two armies overrides the problems with Islamic extremism. Thirdly, China is mindful of Pakistan s vulnerabilities and the latter s links with terror that could result in unpredicted consequences. The possibility of the Af- Pak belt becoming a safe haven for Uighur militants Pak-Occupied Kashmir and India: Can China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) resolve this problem? 89

90 once the US troops leave is very much on Chinese minds. Beijing s eagerness for Afghan reconciliation talks explains that. Yet, Beijing will shield Pakistan while trading on terrorism with terrorists (jihadists, the Taliban and al-qaeda), all of whom receive arms in exchange for refraining from exporting terror into Xinjiang. Fourthly, some analysts view the CPEC in the context of offsetting the growing US-India intimacy as well as China s quid pro quo to counter India s Act East policy. Although such a comparison is nothing but hyperbole, Pakistan does have utility to China for keeping India always edgy. This is a China s nuanced strategy to deter any possible India-US direct prying in Tibetan and Uighur issues. In reality, China would prefer not to bail out Pakistan in moments of its peril. Fifthly, Although, the Kashmir Valley is a landlocked region has no access to the rest of the world except the one link route (which connects Srinagar to Jammu), but will have an absolute and comparative advantage if India participates in this corridor (CPEC). Kashmir, in recent past was connected to Old Silk Route through Gurez (Bandipore) and Ladakh. In doing so, CPEC can provide an opportunity to improve its (Kashmir) interaction with Central Asia, West Asia, the Middle East and Europe and are expected to gain from this connectivity through highways, railways, sea-lanes, energy pipelines and electricity transmission lines through economic activities, increased trade linkages, enhanced technical cooperation, generate new financial opportunities, and amplify socio-cultural connectivity among people which can equally contribute to the socio-economic indicators of the valley this way Kashmir economy will get connected with the rest of the world and at the same time could get big market for its various commodities and would become a large transit zone. The execution of this inclusive project would bring economic revolution that can transform the fate of the valley. Sixthly, If both countries harmonize with the idea, then CPEC can be extended to India through supplementary links from Punjab and Kashmir thus, turning the mutual security threat suspicion to benefits. Moreover, CPEC has the capacity to materialize a faster culmination of Iran-Pak-India gas pipeline to fulfill the energy needs of India. So India should live with the game otherwise India s role would be vanished in future decisions of any economic activity. After knowing about the Strategic Implications of CPEC on India, we can now comfortably move towards the Dilemma. Actually, many Indian Analysts view CPEC as a curse. A majority of Indian thinkers want New Delhi to escalate some firework over the region, in order to disrupt the CPEC Plan... Indian Government has not taken any official stance or has not published any comprehensive doctrine against CPEC. India is immediately concerned with the Via POK status of CPEC. Indian Prime Minister, Shri. Narendra Modi has officially raised concern about this thing. But as the POK is a historic and lengthy, pending dispute; China will not be bothered that much due to such objection from Indian side. Apart from this Via POK thing, New Delhi does not have any declared plan vis-a-vis the overall CPEC development. So, the prevalent question is how should India react to CPEC? Positive or Negative are the alternatives. India will face it hard to Morally Justify to put obstacles in CPEC. Because the POK issue is minor and China will not be bothered any more due to the PENDING label of the age-old Kashmir problem. So, how India can morally oppose the CPEC in whole? So, if India decides to oppose it, it will be through Proxy War and secret tactics. There is a possibility of Chinese Colonisation of Pakistan. Even Pakistani Analysts predict this outcome. Pakistan is actually a fragile state. With no co-operation between the Civilian Executive and Military Warlords, Pakistan can be an easy Prey for a Predator like China in long term. So, this will be Game Changer for India too. Because, it is reasonable to feel safer with China having grip over Pakistan rather than some irresponsible Jihadi cult having the access to nukes... China is a rival of India, but an economic partner too of trade and business. Actually, the threat from China to India is largely economic and hardly in terms of a military attack. Because both of countries are the rising superpowers of world, they will hardly prefer any military confrontation on large scale. But present Pakistan is not like that. India has a Real Permanent Threat of Military Violence from irresponsible leadership 90 World Focus July 2017

91 Pakistan. So, CPEC and consequent Chinese domination of Pakistan can be viewed as a positive factor for India from this point of view. CPEC is emerging as a potential pivot in the geo-strategic calculus between India-Pakistan and China, and it has, for a while, been rearranging conventional parameters of the trilateral equations. From blatant indifference towards India s territorial concerns, to cajoling New Delhi to participate in CPEC and now possibly progressing towards a rather accommodative mode the triangular dynamics between the three countries are unfolding at a fast pace. Seventhly, Connecting Kashgar region of China with Gwadar port of Pakistan, China Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) is an extension of China s OBOR initiative. China via CPEC wants easier access to Middle East; and Pakistan in turn apart from the trade benefits, is excited at the huge Chinese investment in Pakistan that the development of CPEC will follow. Although mostly driven by economic motive, CPEC is of strategic concern to India as it passes through the disputed Gilgit-Baltistan or PoK region. Also CPEC could pose security threats to India and worsen the Indo-Pak relations as Chinese investment could possibly strengthen Pakistani militants. However in long term, it is also possible that an economically developed Pakistan (expected resultant of CPEC) would find the opportunity cost of pursuing anti-india policy high and thereby would prioritise economic cooperation with India over state sponsored cross border terrorism. If this scenario materialises then India would also benefit from the CPEC physical infrastructure to get cheaper connectivity with Central and West Asia. Hence although CPEC has been insensitive to India s sovereign concern posing security threats, in long term Indian soft power could dictate businessmen in an economically developed Pakistan to compel its government to rectify its relationship with India. Therefore we need to worry about the short term implications of CPEC and hence convene international consensus to pressurise China to ensure that the investments are not misused by Pakistani militants and sovereignty of India is respected. But in long term it could possibly be a win-win situation for India. Finally, against this backdrop, Beijing is keen to employ its prêt-à- porter domestic-external interwoven strategy that had been earlier tested in the Xinjiang-Central Asia frontier to fix problems at home and abroad. Therefore, CPEC is a perfect counter-offensive defence strategy for dealing with threats emanating from the Af-Pak region. The focus intensified on CPEC and when Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti advocated why Kashmir can t be part of it and benefit from it, it has stayed in both the political and popular discourse. Jammu and Kashmir could become a corridor of economic activity in the region and the country could take huge benefit of the economic activities going on across the Line of Control. Let us move beyond skirmishes, she said at a seminar in Delhi. Not only did she invoke CPEC as key to economic prosperity but a seminar organised by Kashmir Institute in Srinagar in the recent past evoked serious interest in the subject where experts discussed how CPEC would bear upon Kashmir as a political issue and its resolution. The collective expectation from CPEC for a prosperous Asia is sure to internationalize the core issue of Kashmir and hence force India to resolve it. Policy makers in India need to understand this fact and act accordingly. Merely, closing eyes like a pigeon will not solve the problems but rather will aggravate the situation. Top leadership in Pakistan and China has been offering India to become part of CPEC. But India must first step forward and resolve the Kashmir issue. China s policy until recently has been of restraint and non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries while focusing on its economic growth. Now having achieved its target and already the second largest economy in the world and projected to become the largest by 2030 or maybe well before then, China has started to roll out its plan for new world order. China s recent mediation between Myanmar and Bangladesh over Rohingya issue shows her willingness to play her role in resolving conflicts beyond its borders. This is a sure sign that China will be ready to mediate between Pakistan and India for resolving long outstanding Kashmir issue peacefully. Moreover Pakistan hobnobbing with Russia to join CPEC alongside their recent proactive military diplomacy also indicates new political convergences in transformational shifts in regional political flux. (2) Pak-Occupied Kashmir and India: Can China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) resolve this problem? 91

92 Snubbing Pakistan for sponsoring terrorism and calling upon Pakistan to vacate the portion of Kashmir that remains under its illegal occupation is not new to the Indian policy approach. What is new is the assertion by the Narendra Modi Government on the need to reverse the game by shifting the discourse on Kashmir. New Delhi s new move is accompanied by the sudden sprouting of videos showing Pakistani atrocities in Gilgit and Baltistan (GB).While Pakistan has effectively sustained its Kashmir agenda for seven decades, India has been defensive and sporadic in its claim over Pakistanoccupied Kashmir (PoK). Hopefully, the rhetoric this time is not a propaganda stunt and the policy shift will gain traction. As a step to wreck Pakistan s agenda, India has correctly proscribed the Hurriyat factor from the NSA-level talk denying Pakistan any leeway on both terror and political dialogue. While changing the Kashmir narrative is important, India needs to pay serious attention to the changing nature of power play that has brought PoK to the forefront of China s geopolitical calculations. The region came under spotlight after Xi Jinping announced plans for developing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and pledged USD 46 billion for building transport and energy connectivity to link Pakistan with China s ambitious flagship project One Belt, One Road (OBOR). The August 2015 Karamay Declaration detailed Pakistan s role in China s global scheme. Lately, even Russia has indicated its interest in joining the bandwagon to prop up Pakistan s strategic significance for Eurasian integration. While the Sino-Pak axis in PoK is nothing new, the sheer magnitude of the CPEC plan makes it clear that it is not confined to the single limited objective of boosting Pakistan s prosperity. On the face of it, CPEC signifies the laying of a crucial bridge for China to access the Indian Ocean and conversely for Pakistan to access Eurasia. While the need to capitalise on their political and geographical proximities explain this logic, this is not the entire truth. There is far more to China contemplating heavy investments in a country as perilously poised as Pakistan is.(3) Concerns for India. India needs to be concerned about China attempting to replicate in Pakistan occupied Kashmir the well-perfected policy it has applied earlier in Tibet, Xinjiang and across Central Asia. Beijing would be seeking a historic opportunity to fill up gaps where India has largely failed. Considering PoK s strategic location as a connecting point of South, West, Central and East Asia, China s move has implications for limiting India s outreach to the critical Eurasian region. For Islamabad, Gilgit-Baltistan s assimilation would mean quelling popular sentiment while also deflating India s objections to Chinese activities. But this has not gone well with the Kashmiri separatists including the Hurriyat who are against GB s incorporation into the Pakistani constitution. Meanwhile, Chinese activities in Gilgit- Baltistan are in full swing including the building of hydropower projects at Neelam-Jhelum, Kohala and Chakothi-Hattian that will generate 2,569 MW of power by The China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) recently completed five tunnels over the Attabad Lake in Hunza Valley. Widening of the Jaglot-Skardu Road is in progress. At the other end, China has taken 923 hectares on lease in Gwadar for developing a Special Economic Zone (SEZ). None of these developments stirred up an adequate Indian response. In fact, Beijing justified the CPEC as a livelihood project when concerns were raised by Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his May 2015 visit to China. Clearly, India s unhurried stance on Pakistan occupied Kashmir explains its unwillingness for changing the status quo. New Delhi has been making sporadic and pro forma protests on the PoK issue only for the purpose of countering Pakistan s raising of the K word at the UN. And while Pakistan used global forums as the stick to beat India with on Kashmir, India remains loath to play the United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 of August 1948 that implicitly recognised Indian sovereignty over Jammu&Kashmir and urged Pakistan to vacate territories under its illegal occupation. The nature of developments taking place around PoK is too serious for India to ignore. With CPEC coming into effect, Pakistan has gone on a diplomatic spree offering to shape a New Central Asia through CPEC, asking the landlocked Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) members to use Pakistani ports. 92 World Focus July 2017

93 Pakistan is gaining greater credence in Eurasia as a possible partner. Kazakhstan has already expressed its desire to join the corridor. Renewed efforts are being made to reboot the Quadrilateral Traffic in Transit Agreement (QTTA) with Central Asian states. Pakistan joined the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) in 2010 and it separately seeks Transit Trade Agreement (TTA) with Afghanistan for access to Central Asia. To further boost intra-regional connectivity, Pakistan has recently acceded to the TIR Convention. Involving Iran in the corridor is another ambition. With the current financial down turn in China, it is hard to predict whether CPEC will actually come to fruition. However, the trajectory and even a partial success would be consequential for limiting Indian influence in BRICS and SCO.(4) Options for India India should stop making intermittent and tentative overtures and instead adopt a robust policy on Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. A counter strategy should go beyond building partnerships with the US in the Asia- Pacific. Quite clearly, India s non-endorsement or indifference to China s Silk Road proposal appears to be short-sighted thinking, perhaps stemming from suspicion and insecurity. In any case, India s options are limited. In contrast to the Asia-Pacific, the US is not alarmed at Beijing s push; instead it has been seeking convergence with China perhaps necessitated by the need to share the burden of containing terrorism in Afghanistan. In fact, Washington s own New Silk Route initiative has fallen short perhaps due to shifting priorities and its inability to commit adequate funds. Geopolitically, China too is not risking a zero-sum game with the US in Eurasia. To be also sure, China also knows that the current priority of the West is to break Russia s ambitions in Eurasia rather than to counter China s move. Also, India can do little to stop OBOR or scuttle the CPEC. Almost all the countries in the subcontinent are excited about the project. India s non-participation would lead to isolation and loss of clout at the regional level.being the world s second largest economy and India s largest trading partner, New Delhi is unable to ignore China anyway. To be sure, OBOR may be carrying security undertones but India also requires massive infrastructure investment and only China seems to have the surplus capital. Without partnering with China, India s integration in Asian regionalisation would be less than smooth. Chinese companies are building infrastructure in India and there is little difference whether one gains by helping or limiting China s influence. It cannot be in India s interest to support the project and not reap all the economic benefits of those projects. It is important to establish a fine balance between economics with security. India also cannot ignore the significance of the symbolism of history. After all, it was the Silk Route on which Indian trade and philosophy (Buddhism) travelled to the rest of Asia. Modi himself showed an inclination towards and confidence in dealing with China for building an Asian century. At Ufa, Modi displayed pragmatism by seeking convergence with China and Russia. As China is fast transforming internally, the imperatives of cultural affinity will demand closer propinquity between India and China.(5) Thus, staying outside cannot be to India s advantage. New Delhi needs to re-conceptualise and seek new realities on the ground. China has called upon India to join the Silk Route and India should respond positively while accepting a trade-off here and there. A wise approach would be to join the regional networking process just as India joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). There is nothing wrong in exploring OBOR as an alternative as long as India s security interests are not compromised. Remaining disconnected would only instill greater insecurity and fears of Chinese encirclement. What Modi requires is a policy that would help to overcome predicaments that have thus far stymied India s role in Asia. A Counter Strategy India needs to work on its own counter strategy by offering a plan for a direct India-China Silk Route Corridor (ICSRC) that could run along the traditional Ladakh-Xinjiang axis. A shift in thinking can no longer be put off, for it would mean not just about breaking the connectivity bottlenecks but about finding Pak-Occupied Kashmir and India: Can China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) resolve this problem? 93

94 interlocking economic interests between its northern states and the Eurasian growth story. The ICSRC could provide an alternate transport, energy, trade, fibre optics and communication highway that could originate from a port in Gujarat run across northern India to connect with Kashgar in western China through the Indus Valley in Ladakh. The initiative would have multiple advantages for both India and China without compromising on their respective security concerns. These include: a. The corridor could bring massive Chinese investments for building infrastructure in India that would boost the economy and generate greater employment opportunities. b. India could earn billions as fee from pipeline transit. An energy corridor would help India gain a durable guarantee against any Chinese misadventure across the border. c. There could be a trade-off here in terms of India possibly getting long-distance transport and energy pipelines from Russia through western China. d. ICSRC would blunt the impact of the CPEC. e. For China, ICSRC would be more reliable and less hazardous than risking investments in terrorismplagued Pakistan. f. ICSRC would open a historic opportunity for India to physically connect with markets in China, Eurasia, Europe, and beyond. And, India could offer several other alternate outlets for China through the Northeast or Sikkim that are nearer to Chinese growth centres. If the idea were to be pushed forward, it could become a grand announcement indicating India s willingness to deepen economic engagement with China and would be something akin to how Russia and China started two decades ago. ICSRC could help revive the shared legacy of a common history and culture enriched by the trade in silk and spices. The development could pave the way for strengthening trust between the two countries and eventually contribute to the solution of the boundary problem.icsrc could prove to be a masterstroke of a counter-strategy in India s long-term domestic and foreign policies. It would be a coup de maître for India in dealing with multiple challenges of countering an expansive Chinese foreign policy, aggressive Pakistani designs, the growing threat of extremism, and addressing the connectivity issues.(6) Conclusion The strategic significance of PoK for India lies in the fact that it has long been a territory of armed conflict between India and Pakistan whether it is with regards to the LC situation, terrorist infiltration into India from Pakistan, the 1965 war (Operation Gibraltar and Operation Grand Slam) or as the militarized part of Jammu and Kashmir. The piece of territory has seen a temporary rise in stock with talk of CPEC but forms a small part of the mega project. Ever since the granting of constitutional status to G-B, the region has sparked an important debate in its utility to China and whether it dilutes the broader Kashmir agenda of Pakistan. Previous Indian governments on their part had speculated on the need to match Chinese investments in PoK with Investments in Jammu and Kashmir. But China has not gone into a more meaningful dialogue with India on possible ways of mutual benefit from OBOR without compromising on the disputed nature of PoK. The substantive meaning of the phrase from the point of view of India meant that any Chinese investment in the region of Kashmir would require rigorous political discussion on the naming, nature, mechanism, implementation, joint management and mutual benefit between India and China. China chose to circumvent this important part of the process by getting into an agreement with Pakistan about CPEC in PoK. Thus, India was left with little choice but to invoke territorial disputes and unsustainable debt in order to opt out of OBOR. Notes And References (1) Sumit Walia: CPEC, its economic viability and options for India, Indian Defence Review,October11,2016, p44. (2) Nirupama Rao: The Neighbour s Concern, The Kashmir Monitor, August 31,2016. (3) The Nation, October6, (4) The Times Of India, May 18, (5) Prateek kapil: The Case of PoK-CPEC: What is a meaningful dialogue? CLAWS, No.1746, Vol-476, October06,2015, pp.77,78 (6)P.Stobdan: The Need for Haste on Pakistan-occupied Kashmir: China Pakistan Economic Corridor Needs a Counter Strategy, IDSA, October 07, World Focus July 2017

95 The Kashmir issue has been a bone of contention between two major powers of South Asia that is India and Pakistan. On one hand, India claims the entire territory of Kashmir and wishes to take back Pakistan Occupied Kashmir from Pakistan. On the other hand, Pakistan wants separation of Kashmir from India. Apart from three major wars over the Kashmir issue between the two countries, there has always been tension between the two neighbors which is reflected in the form of spread of terrorism, proxy war and day to day violation of cease fire on the borders. The present paper wishes to analyze the whole issue objectively. How far India is justified in claiming Pakistan occupied Kashmir? Is it really possible to take back the same from Pakistan s occupation? What are the ways to establish peace and prosperity in South Asian region? Kashmir issue has been the most controversial issue between two major countries of South Asia that is India and Pakistan. It appears from present scenario that this problem is unsolvable in future. Neither India nor Pakistan is ready to give up their claim in this region. Presently, the entire territory of Kashmir is divided into three parts. Almost two third part of Kashmir is with India, about one third part is in Pakistan and a small portion of it has been gifted to China by Pakistan government. Here, we are more concerned about Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK). The area of POK is about kms. Its capital is at Muzaffarabad. The POK is called Azad Kashmir by Pakistan authorities. It is referred to as Pakistan administered Kashmir by the UN and other international organizations. India calls it Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK). It shares its borders with china and Afghanistan in the north, Pakistan in the west and India in the east. It was never ruled by the British but always by a hereditary monarch. In 1963, Pakistan gifted the northern most part of POK to china. 1 The Contested Notion of PoK and Concerns for Regional Prosperity Pankaj Lakhera It is upto the policy makers to decide the policies about various issues including that of Pakistan occupied Kashmir. But, being the student of international relations, we may examine the existing policies and acts of governments and explore all types of future possibilities. Genesis of the problem The root cause of Kashmir problem lies in its history. At the time of independence, 562 princely states which were not in direct control of the British were given options of either join India or Pakistan remain independent. One of these princely states was the state of Kashmir, ruled by Maharaja Hari Singh. The problem with the maharaja of Kashmir was that he was a Hindu ruler of a Muslim state. He might have chosen to join India but decided to remain independent due to the instance of his prime minister, sheikh Abdullah. After the annexation of Junagarh, Sardar Patel wanted to annex Kashmir also but it could not be materialized as Kashmir was invaded by Pathan tribesmen. They entered the Kashmir state on 22 October 1947 and started plundering and killing the people. The invasion was carried out on plea of jihad against the oppressors of Muslims in Kashmir. As the invaders were about to reach Sri Nagar and hari singh was not able to resist them, he wrote a letter to lord mount baton for Indian military intervention. At this juncture, hari singh was given two choices by India, either join the union of India or fight with the invaders on his own. Hari singh signed the treaty of accession to union of India without any ifs and buts. From then onwards, Kashmir legally became an integral part of India. India send her troops in the valley and freed sri nagar and punch but by that time Pakistan government, had already established a public government, called azad Kashmir, in the area beyond Muzaffarabad which was totally controlled by the Pakistan government. They also supported the rebels in this region. Nehru as an idealist went to the United Nations Organization (UNO). The UN order ceases fire in the region. Consequently, Nehru ordered his troops to stop proceeding The Contested Notion of PoK and Concerns for Regional Prosperity 95

96 immediately. Indian troops thus could not conquer the entire territory of Kashmir. One third part of the state remained with Pakistan which was named as Pakistan occupied Kashmir. In 1972, the then existing border between India and Pakistan in Kashmir was designated as the line of control 2 It must be kept in mind that the accession day, 26 th of October is celebrated as state holiday in j and k. in 1947; it was celebrated by bursting crackers, singing Indian national anthem and by hoisting Indian flag. So, the people of Kashmir state at that time were fully in favor of India. On the other hand, the separatists celebrate it as black day. 3 Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: the Indian perspective Recently, it has been reported by several news papers that Modi charisma and style of governance has encouraged residents of POK to demand that they want to become a part of India. They are very much impressed by India s positive action during the 2014 floods and 2015 earth quake in Kashmir. Chairman of the Anjuman Minhaj-e-Rasool, Moulana Syed Athar Hussain Dehlavi, who recently toured POK, said that people residing in the region want to be a part of India. According to Dehlavi, the people of the region are distressed with growing extremism in Pakistan and want to lead a peaceful life. Given the opportunity, they would want a referendum so that they can vote to join back India. They are very much impressed by modi s good governance. They are openly demanding freedom from Pakistan as reported widely by Pakistan media. On 7 th of September 2014, when Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz sharif visited the flood affected areas in POK, it was boycotted by the slogans go nawaz go. Conscious of the deteriorating situation in POK, PM Modi made an offer of all possible help to the people there, when he visited flood affected area of the Kashmir Valley last year. 4 Similarly, external affairs minister sushma swaraj also condemned Pakistan when it declared Gilgit baltitstan as its fifth province because legally the whole area of Kashmir belongs to India. India also criticized the construction of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) corridor by china which passes through the territory of POK on the same ground. 5 Legally speaking, whole area of Kashmir including the POK should belong to India. Kashmir became an integral part of India when Maharaja Hari Singh signed instrument of accession to India although whole territory of Kashmir could not come under India s control. The instrument called for a referendum in the state of Kashmir regarding the choice of people whether they want to join India, Pakistan or remain independent after tribesmen would be driven out. Often, India is blamed for not holding that referendum in Kashmir. But, this charge is baseless as it was Pakistan which had to withdraw first from Kashmir if the referendum is to take place. So, India cannot be blamed if referendum did not take place. It must be noted that the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh on the 26th October, 1947, was in the same form1 as was executed by the Rulers of the numerous other States which had acceded to India following the enactment of Indian Independence Act, Keeping in mind the spirit of instrument of accession of Kashmir to India, The constitution of India ensures enough autonomy of state of Jammu and Kashmir. According to article 1 of Indian constitution, entire Kashmir including POK forms a part of territory of India. It has been mentioned as the 15 th state of the union of India in first schedule of the constitution. In present legislative assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, there are 100 seats in total out of which 24 are remain vacant as they are meant for the people of POK. The instrument of accession, signed by Maharaja Hari singh, gave jurisdiction to government of India over the subjects of defense, external affairs and communication of state of Kashmir. Although, the state became a part of India, the provisions of the Constitution applicable to other States were not extended to Jammu & Kashmir. This peculiar position was due to the fact that having regard to circumstances in which the State acceded to India; the Government of India had declared that it was the people of the State of Jammu & Kashmir, acting through their Constituent Assembly, who were to finally determine the Constitution of State and jurisdiction of the Union of India World Focus July 2017

97 With this object in view, the people of State elected a sovereign Constituent Assembly which met for the first time on October 31, The constituent assembly prepared the state constitution of Kashmir which is there in the Indian constitution under article 370. In February, 1954, the Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir ratified the State s Accession to India. This act of Constituent Assembly was followed up by the promulgation by the President of India of the Constitution (Application to Jammu & Kashmir) Order, The order ensured the applicability of provisions of Constitution of India governing the relationship between the Union and the State. According to this Order, the jurisdiction of the Union extended to all Union subjects under the Constitution of India (subject to certain slight alterations) instead of only the three subjects of Defense, Foreign Affairs and Communications with respect to which the State had acceded to India in Thus, government of India tried to fulfill maximum conditions as mentioned in the instrument of accession of Kashmir to India. 8 Another argument supporting India s point of view about POK may be India s secular polity, democracy and composite culture. The Indian constitution cherishes the values of democracy and secularism. The preamble of the constitution, calls India a democratic, secular, socialist republic. The fundamental rights under the third part of constitution mentions the rights of equality, liberty and other fundamental rights including the freedom of religion for setting up an equal and secular society. Our freedom fighters and makers of constitution believed in the ideal of secularism. They rejected the idea of two nation theory which was propounded by Muslim League. That is why Millions of Muslims are staying in India without any major problem. We are proud to have Muslim population in India which is much larger than the whole population of Indonesia or Pakistan. For centuries, the Indian culture has been a composite culture. We are having the tendency of assimilation. People of different communities have been living peacefully in India for centuries. It is an example, which is rare in the world. There may be difference in terms of religion or language, but, our culture is same. That is why; the Muslims of India may find themselves closer to Hindus of this country in comparison to the Muslims of west Asia or any other part of the world. Following this argument, we may say that if POK becomes a part of India, there won t be any problem in terms of their assimilation in Indian society. We may also find justification of Indian claim to POK if we compare POK with Indian Jammu and Kashmir In terms of economic prosperity, individual freedom and protection of human rights. It has been reported by Pakistan media that people of POK are now fed up with the atrocities committed on them by Pakistan army. For last several decades, they have been neglected by Islamabad. Instead of doing development activities, Pakistan government is just nurturing terrorist camps there. 9 On the other hand, the province of Jammu and Kashmir is given special status under article 370 of Indian constitution. It is enjoying maximum autonomy which has not been assigned to any other state of country. Article 370 also protects the demographic profile of Kashmir as the people of other states cannot stay there permanently. They cannot get any job in Kashmir. Government of India has spent enormous amount of money for development of the state. Ever since its incorporation in the union of India, all governments at the centre, irrespective of their party lines, have given thousands of crores of Rupees in the form of special package to the state. In recent years, vast rail and road network has been constructed in the state which has incurred huge cost due to the topography of area As per the Economic survey of India , The Life Expectancy of males and females at national level stands at & years, respectively. As far as, the J&K State is concerned, the life expectancy of males & females stands at 66.5 and 69.3 years, respectively; which is more than the national average. The education is on the rise in the state. During the decade , literacy rate increased from 55.50% to 68.74% in the State as against 64.84% to 74.04% at the national level. Over the years, J&K has achieved many milestones in higher education. By the year , the number of The Contested Notion of PoK and Concerns for Regional Prosperity 97

98 colleges has increased to 95 including 12 women degree colleges. Two Central Universities, one each at Jammu and Srinagar, are functional in the State. Five universities, i.e. two State universities, two Govt. aided universities and one Private University with intake capacity of 11,400 students, are also functioning in the State. 10 Kashmir is one of the prosperous states of India. Tourism is the back bone of state economy. Kashmir is known internationally for its tourism spots. For the last few years, the government has identified 20 spots against 5 traditional spots for enlarging the scope of tourism. 11 There is no doubt that had POK been a part of India, it would have enjoyed same facilities which are being enjoyed by the people of Indian side of Kashmir. Practical problems in getting back POK from Pakistan The Indians may have sound arguments regarding the legal ownership of entire Kashmir state but those arguments have not been endorsed by Pakistan and many other countries of the world. There are certain lacunas in India s claim over Kashmir. Before analyzing the issue of legal ownership of entire Jammu and Kashmir region including the POK, we must consider the political situation which was prevailing at the time of partition. The British left India by partitioning it into two parts that is India and Pakistan. Apart from this, there were 562 princely states which were not in direct control of the British. They were given option to either join India or Pakistan or remain independent. Both India and Pakistan were busy in winning over these states either by hook or by crook. For instance, the state of Junagarh was a Hindu majority state with a Muslim ruler who signed the instrument of accession to Pakistan. But, India cut off all the supplies to Junagarh from her territory and compelled nawab to surrender. While Pakistan was busy with Kashmir, sardar Patel send troops to Junagarh and annexed it. So, the instrument of accession to Pakistan could not be put into practice. Similarly, Hyderabad was also in the same situation and wanted to join Pakistan. During operation Polo in 1948, Indian army captured entire territory of Hyderabad. The nawab was forced the sign the standstill agreement so that he could not join Pakistan. Thus, the Indians diplomatically took over the princely states where there was Hindu majority but which were being ruled by Muslim rulers and which were surrounded by Indian Territory. 12 Now, the case of Kashmir was very complicated. It was a state with Muslim majority having a Hindu ruler. In Kashmir, the ruler wanted to make standstill agreement with India and Pakistan. Pakistan accepted it but India did not give its assent before ensuring that sheikh Abdullah becomes the prime minister of state. Nehru believed that establishment of sheikh would facilitate the merger of Kashmir into Indian union as Abdullah was close to him during the quit India movement and also launched the same type of stir in the Kashmir valley against the king. He could not understand that the king actually wanted to join India after independence but needed time and so asking for standstill agreement. On the other hand, Pakistan signed the same. Pakistan also could not wait for a long time and send tribesmen in the valley. This incident was followed by signing of instrument of accession to India by maharaja hari singh and subsequent entry of Indian army in Kashmir. Indian army was forcing tribesmen back and conquering the area. At this juncture, Indian Prime Minister Nehru made a strategic mistake. In 1948 he prematurely went to the UN for solving the Kashmir issue. The UN immediately ordered the cease fire and India could not conquer the entire territory of Kashmir. 13 The cease fire was formally declared on the night of 1 January The net result of cease fire was that two third part of Kashmir remained with India while one third of it went in Pakistan control. Had Nehru not gone to the UN and the cease fire had not been declared, the Kashmir issue would have been resolved forever. The issue became more complicated when in 1963, Pakistan gifted northern most part of POK to china. In 1972, the then existing border between India and Pakistan in Kashmir was designated as the line of control. 98 World Focus July 2017

99 Apart from historical facts which are a hinderence in the resolution of Kashmir issue, there are certain other contemporary problems. The POK and Gilgit baltitstan is entirely Muslim populated area from where the minority Hindus have already been driven out in Real problem is not the religion but fundamentalist and extremist ideology which has been inculcated among the people there for decades. So, India may find it difficult to win support of the local people (what). On the other hand, Pakistan government is giving impression that they are totally just and want to make Kashmir an independent state. They are there for the wellbeing of POK people. The POK is governed by a self governing legislative assembly. The government of POK is based upon the west minister system with president as the head of state while the prime minister is the head of government. They also have the Supreme Court and a high court. In other words, the Pakistanis pretending to keep its promise to make Kashmir an independent state. 14 But, practically speaking, the government in POK is totally controlled by Pakistan government. (Post) The ministry of azad Kashmir affairs under the Pakistan government is the link between Pakistan government and the self governing unicameral legislative assembly of POK. Neither POK nor Gilgit baltitstan elect the members for Pakistan national assembly. The POK is a self governing state under Pakistan control. According to Pakistan constitution, it is not formally a part of the country as the dispute related to it has not been resolved yet. Pakistan is administering it as a self governing territory as the UN resolution calls for a referendum. However, the Pakistan government has not allowed POK to issue their own postage stamps. The residents of POK are not given basic freedoms and the Pakistan government exercises strict control over the people. 15 It is also not wise to win over POK from Pakistan as it is not economic to do so. Maximum arable land of Kashmir falls in India. The POK is scarcely populated area as it is less arable and has rugged mountains. Even the china controlled territory of shag is and aksai chin are filled with soda lakes. So, it is not economic to hold such territory. (What) 87 percent households are involved in agriculture? Tourism is another source of making livelihood. (Post) the valley has practically no economic value for both the countries. But, it is a matter of pride. It would be a political suicide if any government on either side would become soft on the issue. 16 During 1970s both the countries developed nuclear weapons. So, if Kashmir war takes place to get back the POK, Pakistan may resort to nuclear attack. Hence, the POK cannot be taken from Pakistan due to the nuclear deterrent. 17 What is main reason? The POK is a very high mountainous region which is very tough to capture and to control. Topographic map of POK shows it has high concentration of world s highest mountains. Kashmir as a whole has very limited approach from India but has better approaches from Pakistan. (That s why we could not take its total control during first war and thus POK was formed.)the POK has major anti India and pro Pakistan sentiments, so, even if we capture it, it would be very difficult to retain it. The people of that area will be a security risk for rest of India. 18 Another problem in getting POK back from Pakistan is the involvement of China. China is major ally of Pakistan and the biggest arm supplier to it. Chinese are constructing the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) which connects the North West part of China with the port of Karachi. The corridor passes through the POK area. The CPEC made by china passes through POK. China has also heavily invested in various projects in Pakistan. So, if POK is attacked, china would immediately come into picture and it would be very difficult for India to face two nuclear power simultaneously, 19 Apart from this, there are certain international compulsions also. We are bound by UN resolution over Kashmir issue. We cannot afford to violate it openly. The crossing of line of control in Kashmir region would be considered violation of international law. It might be followed by international sanctions against India. The war efforts of India may be crippled as she imports most of arms and fuel from abroad. Pakistan would be diplomatically victorious as it wants to internationalize the Kashmir issue from the very beginning. 20 The Contested Notion of PoK and Concerns for Regional Prosperity 99

100 Not only this, this move may also badly affect our development efforts. Today, India is one of the emerging economies of the world. In terms of the size of economy, it stands third in the world. We need a lot of direct foreign investment for infra structure development. We are signing a number of agreements with different countries in the world for energy security, defense procurement and other technological requirements. All these development efforts would be sabotaged if we try to capture the POK. Because most of our resources would be diverted to take over POK and defend it in future. 21 Taking over POK means that we would also be sharing borders with areas in Afghanistan which are full of most dangerous terrorist organizations in the world like Taliban. India already spends 10% of its Budget on Jammu-Kashmir that has just 1% of Indian population. Adding POK to that means spending more amount of money, sending more troops and using more weapons etc to protect the territory. 2 2 In the eyes of international community, India is a responsible state. Although, it is a nuclear power, but has declared no first use of nuclear weapons. We are against all types of imperialism, racism and colonialism. We are one of the founding members of United Nations Organization. We are the leader of Non Alignment movement. India, the country which provides highest number of volunteers to the United Nations Peace Keeping Force, a country that wants permanent membership in United Nations Security Council, cannot afford to violate any international law. Such an aggressive step would spoil the future prospects of India to get key position in international organizations. 23 Making peace and prosperity in the region through mutual cooperation One must keep in mind that India and Pakistan. the two poor nations, are the biggest buyers of arms in the world. This is due to lack of trust on each other. For the last 70 years, we have been pursuing policy of enmity towards each other. This is due to narrow mindedness on the part of our policy makers and common man. In present era of weapons of mass destruction, the open fully fledged war is a remote possibility. The only way to disturb the enemy state is the policy of spreading terrorism and proxy war in that state. Enormous resources have been spent on purchase of arms, wars and spreading insurgency. Had these resources been spent for eradicating poverty and for bringing development, these countries would have joined the group of developed nations. If we consider whole issue of indo Pakistan relations in a broader framework of south Asian region, we would find that it is in interest of two nations to solve all the contentious issues including the issue of Kashmir amicably. In terms of human development index, South Asia ranks at very low position. Only 62 percent of young women and 77 percent of young men are able to read and write in South Asia. This is also a region where almost half of the unemployed people are young adults, in the area of gender index South Asia is the third lowest performing regions of the world. If the global hunger index of South Asia is taken, then it figures as the second worst performing regions of the world. In the list of despairs or failures, South Asia also has 399 million poor people of the world (that is 40 percent of the world s poor) who are living on less than $1.25 a day. 24 The question of the hour is How to increase regional cooperation. How to bring a shared prosperity. We have to fight with poverty, hunger and unemployment rather than fighting with each other. If we support terrorism and violation of human rights, we leave behind all the crucial problems of the region. We should not forget the fact that South Asia is one of the fastest growing regions of the world. Henry Kissinger, in one of his articles, says that global balance of power is shifting from Pacific to the Indian Ocean. It means that in future, it is south Asia and China which are going to be the centre of power in the world. We must not miss this opportunity by fighting over meaningless issues. According to a World Bank report the economic growth in South Asia averages 6 percent a year for over the last 20 years. This growth rate is projected to touch 7.6 percent by 2017 according to the continuing trends, which reflects some strong consumption and investments. Interestingly this economic growth does not get reflected in the intra-regional trade of South Asia, which was around 5.31 percent in Even though 100 World Focus July 2017

101 South Asian economies opted for global integration but they never showed similar concerns for their regional economic integration. We have to fully realize this potential of the SAARC region. 25 Future economic growth of South Asian countries is largely dependent on regional integration. Their improved regional infrastructure, cooperation in energy sectors, regional common markets, and product standardization. The conflict over contentious issues like Kashmir will increase regional imbalance. It cannot be solved if viewed from a political angle. We have to find out the ways which are amicable and serve mutual interests. India has taken some positive steps for increasing regional cooperation in south Asian region. In 2015, a breakthrough in indo Bangladesh relation came when both the countries sign the agreement for the exchange of enclaves which fall in each other s territory. Similarly, there is talk about road connectivity among India, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh. Similar achievements can be there in indo Pakistan relations if both the major power of this region tries to resolve the Kashmir issue through mutual consent, there is big scope of cooperation in the field of trade and commerce. India has given Most Favored Nation status to Pakistan which has not been reciprocated by Pakistan. If there is peace between the two major countries of south Asia, it would lead to mutual trust which would be in turn allow all other things happen in a smooth manner. If there is peace and stability in the region, it would help in bringing energy security. For the last few years, there is discussion about Iran, Pakistan, and India gas pipeline. Similarly, one more proposal is TAPI gas pipeline, which would be bringing gas from Turkmenistan to India through Afghanistan and Pakistan. But, due to lack of trust and disturbances in Kashmir region, no breakthrough has been achieved in this respect. The people to people contact is essential for building greater trust among the countries of the region. There are visa restrictions and foreign exchange issues that hamper tourism. There are major problems in travelling from one country to another through road and rail. An atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust prevails between India and Pakistan regarding the free movement of people and goods within the region. Greater amount of travel by citizens of both countries would develop a common South Asian identity which is so important for any regional integration. An expansion in tourism will encourage trade and investment. 26 People to people contact can influence political will and boost political commitment for regional cooperation. Whenever there has been people to people contact between Indians and Pakistanis, there have been expressions of solidarity with one another. 27 There can be cooperation in non conventional sources of energy and finding alternative to fossil fuels. Possibilities of energy cooperation are likely to go forward in the future. Already energy deals between India and Bangladesh have been signed in energy and also with India and Nepal. India signed a deal to build 960 megawatts Arun III dam in Eastern Nepal. Most of the electricity generated will be exported to India. India has agreed to supply 600 MW of electric power from the grid at Palatana (Tripura) to Bangladesh. The region is one of the most energy deficient regions in the world. In Bangladesh only 47 per cent have access to electricity. Alternate sources of energy would give power to the region such as wind, water, and nuclear and further industrialization Connectivity is extremely important for the region s prosperity and getting linked with ASEAN, Central Asia and Europe. The revival of the Silk Route is an important development which India and its neighbours cannot miss. Recently, Pakistan s reluctance to come on board on the connectivity agreement seems to be in response to India breaking away from its promised bilateral talks over Kashmir after Pakistan refused to stop talking to Kashmiri separatists. It has also shown resistance in India s request for transit for goods and passenger by road through Pakistan territory to Afghanistan. Clearly this move is not going to increase connectivity in the region. 29 All the above said objectives may be realized if there is mutual trust between the two big powers The Contested Notion of PoK and Concerns for Regional Prosperity 101

102 that is India and Pakistan. On the other hand, if they keep on disturbing each other through wrongful means, all the possibilities would be lost. Conclusion There is no doubt that ideally speaking; entire territory of Kashmir including POK should come under India s control. But, ideal situation cannot be realized easily. We have to bear with the realities of international politics. Mutual cooperation between India and Pakistan and excepting the line of control in Kashmir as international border is the solution. Both the countries should leave possession for each other s territory. If they live peacefully, there is great potential for greater connectivity, trade and commerce, energy security and regional integration and they may prosper at a much faster pace. Endnotes 1Farida Rizwan, 17 lesser known factors about POK, 2Navneet Singh, What is the story behind Pakistan occupied Kashmir, 3 Postoast Staff, - 21 lesser known facts about Pakistan occupied Kashmir every Indian should know 4Zee News, Modi affect: Pakistan occupied Kashmir wants to be a part of India 5The Hitavada, Sushma, POK belongs to India 6Durga Das Basu, introduction to the constitution of India, Vadhwa and company, Law publishers, New Delhi IBID 8IBID 9Zee News, Modi affect: Pakistan occupied Kashmir wants to be a part of India 10Economic Survey , a general review of Kashmir Life. 11IBID 12Navneet Singh, What is the story behind Pakistan occupied Kashmir, 13IBID 14Bharat Bhushan, what is the Real meaning of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, 15Postoast Staff, 21 lesser known facts about Pakistan occupied Kashmir every Indian should know 16IBID 17Balaji Vishwanathan, What is main reason India does not try to annex the part of Kashmir controlled by Pakistan 18IBID 19Indian Defense Update, with OBOR, China becomes real third party in Kashmir 20Saurav, Why cannot india occupy Pakistan occupied Kashmir 102 World Focus July IBID 22IBID 23IBID 24Dhananjay Tripathy, A region of hope and despair,. 25 IBID 26Jayshree Sengupta, SAARC and its future, 27 IBID 28IBID 29IBID Sources 1)Basu Durga das, Introduction to the constitution of India, Vadhwa and company, Law publishers, New Delhi )Bhushan Bharat, what is the Real meaning of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 3)Economic Survey , a general review of Kashmir Life, retrieved from on 17 th May 2017 at 9:00 pm. 4)Indian Defense Update, with OBOR, China becomes real third party in Kashmir retrieved from defenceupdate.in/ on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 5)Postoast Staff, - 21 lesser known facts about Pakistan occupied Kashmir every Indian should know retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 6)Rizwan Farida, 17 lesser known factors about POK, retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 7)Saurav, Why cannot India occupy Pakistan occupied Kashmir retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 8)Sengupta Jayshree, SAARC and its future, retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00 pm. 9)Singh Navneet, What is the story behind Pakistan occupied Kashmir, retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 10)The Hitavada, POK belongs to India: Sushma retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 11)Tripathy Dhananjay, A region of hope and despair, retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00 pm. 12)Vishwanathan Balaji, What is main reason India does not try to annex the part of Kashmir controlled by Pakistan retrieved from on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm. 13)Zee News, Modi affect: Pakistan occupied Kashmir wants to be a part of India retrieved from zeenews.india.com on 17 th may 2017 at 9:00pm.

103 Geo-Politics of Gilgit-Baltistan: India and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Shivani Sharma Introduction The British decision to quit India brought forth an essential question on the status of the princely states and their relationship with India and Pakistan. The British Cabinet Mission in 1946 however had declared that Britain s paramountcy over the princely states would not be transferred to the successor government(s) but would simply lapse, meaning, rights that had been surrendered by Indian princes to the paramount power will return to the states ( Menon 1955:47) 1.The stand on the status of princely states in the Cabinet Mission memorandum was further reiterated and acknowledged in the partition plan of June 3, 1947, which specifically declared that the envisaged partition and transfer of power will not extend to the princely states. Therefore, it left the question on the status and future of princely states unclear. The princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was India s largest princely state in 1947 with an area of 84,471 sq.miles and falls naturally into four regions. In the South lies Jammu; in the centre is the Kashmir Valley with Srinagar as its capital; to the North is Gilgit and between the Kashmir Valley and Tibet is the province of Ladakh. At the time of the partition, the state had important international boundaries such as to the East was Tibet, to the North-east lay the Sinkiang province of China and to the North-West was Afghanistan. Therefore, it was difficult to determine the future of such a diverse, disparate and disunited princely state. Though, shortly before the transfer of power, the government of Jammu and Kashmir under Major General Janak Singh intended to show his interest negotiating the standstill agreement with the respective governments of India and Pakistan. While Pakistan signed the Standstill agreement, India took time to examine its implications. However, the execution of the standstill agreement did not result in cordial relations between Kashmir and Pakistan as Pakistan in an effort to coerce the state to accede, decided to cut off the supply of essential commodities, and mounted military pressure in the form of hit- and run border raids. The all-out invasion of Kashmir started on October 22, 1947, when the few tribal raiders aided and abetted by Pakistani army marched into the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. The objective of the operation was to either throw away Maharaja Hari Singh; the then ruler of the sovereign state of Jammu and Kashmir and annex the state, or force him to accede to Pakistan. The areas of Muzaffarabad, Uri and Baramullah were almost taken by the fourth day of the invasion. The raiders had captured the Mathura Power house, a major supplier house of electricity to Srinagar and announced to capture Srinagar on October 26, The invasion however left the Maharaja alarmed with no choice but to seek help from the Indian State. A team led by V.P. Menon and other army and air force officers was sent to Srinagar to assess the situation. However, Lord Mountbatten was apprehensive to move the Indian troops into what was at the moment an independent country, as the state of Jammu and Kashmir had not yet decided to accede to either India or Pakistan. Maharaja therefore, agreed to sign the instrument of accession with India. The Defence committee in New Delhi thus reviewed the instrument and decided to accept the accession and agreed to send the battalion forces to combat the raiders (Menon 1955 : ). Indian troops were flown into Srinagar on the morning of October 27, 1947, and reoccupied Uri on November 14. Though, Indian troops did make progress, they could not completely drive out the raiders and the Pakistani army, thus resulting the division of the Dogra Kingdom into the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) ( Kalyanaraman 2007:77-78). 2 Geo-Politics of Gilgit-Baltistan: India and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor 103

104 Pakistan occupies 78, 114 sq. kilometres out of the total area of 222,236 sq. kilometres comprising the state of Jammu and Kashmir. POK is the total area under Pakistani occupation, which has been further divided by Pakistan into the so called Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) comprising Mirpur district of Jammu, and a portion of the North Western Kashmir province, which constitutes less than 15 per cent of the territory under Pakistani occupation; and the sparsely populated Northern Areas, now known as Gilgit-Baltistan, an amorphous entity governed directly by Islamabad, which constitutes more than 85 per cent of POK. Geographically, the area of Gilgit-Baltistan is of paramount importance to both India and Pakistan. Strategically located, sharing international borders and rich in mineral resources, the area has great attraction and potential in serving both commercial and security interests and therefore has become a major cause of conflict between India and Pakistan. The conflict over the political status of the area and the growing development and infrastructural programs in the region; especially with the increased presence of the Chinese troops under CPEC has further intensified the tensions between India and Pakistan.Though, before deliberating upon the concerns and claims of both the states, it is imperative to comprehend the history and the political status of the area. Gilgit-Baltistan: In a State of Constitutional Limbo? The British government recognised Maharaja Gulab Singh s full independence over Kashmir as per the 1846 Treaty of Amritsar. With the signing of the Treaty of Amritsar, the British encouraged Gulab Singh to spread his political influence in Gilgit-Baltistan in order to establish a safe buffer state between Russia and British India (Stobdan 2007:33). 3 By 1870, the Dogras were in entire control of the region and signed treaties with rulers of Hunza and Nagar making them vassals of Kashmir. Though, fearing Soviet s expansionist moves in the region, the British in 1935 took possession of what is known as the Gilgit-Leased Area, the area surrounding the right bank of River Indus from Maharaja Hari Singh for 60 years. Though, the area south of the River Indus in Dardistan and the entire Baltistan remained under the direct control of the Maharaja (Snedden 2015:92). 4 However, with the lapse of paramountcy, and according to the Cabinet mission memorandum, the political department retroceded the Gigit agency back to the Maharaja on August 1, The administrative control of all areas of the Gilgit Agency, including Hunza were handed over to the Kashmir State government under Brigadier Ghansar Singh who was then appointed as the Governor by the Maharaja on July 19, Though, as a condition to serve the state, the Commandant of Gilgit Scouts, Major Brown and other officers demanded an improvement in the service conditions of the troops along with a salary hike. Moreover, the administration in the agency paralysed as some of the British officers had opted to side with Pakistan. Thus, the Gilgit Scouts and the local as well as non-locals refused to cooperate with the new governor to run the administration of the state. Despite repeated attempts, the Maharaja administration did not pay much heed to the growing developments in the Gilgit agency. Soon after the ostensible surrender of the Governor, a provisional government of People s Republic of Gilgit and Baltistan was announced and an invite was sent to the Pakistan government to help administer the region. On November 4, 1947, the Pakistani flag was hoisted at the Gigit Scouts lines by Major Brown as he conceded to the accession of Gilgit to Pakistan. Subsequently, the rulers of the enclaves of Hunza and Nagar within the Gilgit agency, which were vassals of the Maharaja of Kashmir also declared their accession to Pakistan (Bansal 2007: 87). 5 Since then Northern Areas (Gilgit-Baltistan), a cold desert covered around in the area of 72,495 sq km is administered directly by the federal government of Pakistan. The fate of Gilgit was decided on April 28,1949 when officials of Pakistan government met with those of Azad Jammu and Kashmir government and inked the Karachi agreement. Under the accord, the leadership of AJK conceded administration of Northern Areas (Gilgit-Baltistan) to Pakistan. It was decided that the affairs of Gilgit will be run by the Pakistan government rather than the AJK government. The decision however was taken without the presence or consent of any leader and people from Gilgit. 104 World Focus July 2017

105 Pakistan government therefore introduced a separate ministry in the name of Federal ministry of Kashmir affairs and Northern areas to run matters of state affairs in Gilgit and adjoining areas. 6 Subsequently, while AJK has its own constitution governed under the Interim Constitution Act, 1974, Pakistan did not let Northern Areas to be part of Azad Kashmir. Gilgit-Baltistan therefore remains in a state of political limbo for over half a century. However, many cosmetic changes were introduced in the area by different governments in Pakistan, yet none of them guaranteed constitutional rights to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. The area was given an advisory council in 1975 during the Prime ministership of Z.A. Bhutto. Whereas, in March 1999, Pakistan Supreme court in its order declared that the Northern areas be given the same political, economic and administrative rights as given to other provinces of Pakistan. 7. The verdict resulted in a cosmetic change as the Northern Areas Advisory council was upgraded to the Northern Areas Legislative Council ( NALC), following the Northern Areas Council legal framework order Although, there was no real authority gained as the chief executive of the council was the federal minister for Kashmir affairs and Northern areas, an appointee of the federal government. The NALC was therefore practically controlled by the Ministry of Kashmir affairs and Northern areas (KANA) and had limited scope of voicing out its grievances against Islamabad ( Sridhar 2008: 100). 8 With the increased demand for greater autonomy, a new power sharing formula was devised by the federal government in 2002 wherein the Northern areas affairs were delinked from the Kashmir affairs division. The new formula provided the local level administrators the decision making authority on financial, administrative and development matters. Though, the matters on prisons, law and home affairs remained with the chief executive. 9 However, any demand for a politically empowered elected body was repeatedly stuck down by the Pakistan ruling establishment on the ground that any attempt to change the status of the northern areas would weaken Pakistan s case over Jammu and Kashmir. The government always maintained that the Northern areas are a part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir and altering with its status would make Pakistan s claim over it attenuated. Hence, the area has been left clutching for an identity beset in regard to its constitutional inclusion in Pakistan as the fifth province or its integration with the state of Jammu and Kashmir as one of the unit of probable plebiscite. The Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order 2009 was one of the first major move by the PPP government towards full internal autonomy of the area. The order intended to provide greater political empowerment and better governance to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. Reform introduced through a Presidential order and approved by the federal cabinet, provided the area a status similar to that of a province and brought it at par with the other provinces of Pakistan but however not a province. Under the order, the name of the area was changed from Northern areas to Gilgit-Baltistan. It approved the office of an elected Chief Minister by an elected legislative assembly and the Governor to be appointed by the President of Pakistan on the advice of the Prime Minister of Pakistan. On similar pattern of AJK council, a GB council, headed by the Prime Minister was also introduced. 10 Under the order, the Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly was delegated with the powers of approving the budget. Moreover, the concept of consolidated fund was introduced and the legislative powers of the Assembly were increased from 49 to 61 subjects along with the power to legislate on all other subjects not in the domain of the Gilgit-Baltistan Council. 11 However, the order still did not guarantee a provincial status as the people of Gilgit-Baltistan have been living with an indeterminate constitutional status for over 60 years; and are denied any representation in the Parliament and the senate of Pakistan. Whereas, the Azad Jammu and Kashmir have an elaborate governance structure operating under an interim constitution enacted by the legislative assembly in Pakistan thus is confronted with three major obstacles in the act of incorporation. Firstly, in order to create a province of Gilgit-Baltistan, it would require consent of other provinces and would require to create national assembly seats and senators. Secondly, Islamabad is faced with the Geo-Politics of Gilgit-Baltistan: India and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor 105

106 problem created by its own stand on Kashmir as absorption of Gilgit-Baltistan would imply Pakistan s acknowledgement to India s right to hold the territories of Jammu and Kashmir. Thirdly, repeated demands are raised by the people of Gilgit-Baltistan to have a separate entity to themselves ( Stobdan 2007:51). Indian government has repeatedly raised concerns over the obscure status of Gilgit-Baltistan since It opposed and criticised Pakistan s illegal cession of part of territory occupied in Kashmir. The China-Pakistan Boundary Agreement of 1963 became a major bone of contention for India and its relations with its neighbours, Pakistan and China. Under the agreement, Pakistan ceded 5,180 kms of Indian territory in POK to China. India thereby objected the cessation and called the agreement illegal and invalid. 12 On July 15, 2009 in response to India s take on the loss of territory, India s then Minister of State for External Affairs, Preneet Kaur maintained that, Pakistan had no legitimacy of her contiguous areas with Chinese Sinkiang and had surrendered a large area of Indian territory to China. 13 India also lodged its protests against the Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order It maintained that Pakistan has for the past six decades denied the basic democratic rights to the people in those parts of the state of Jammu and Kashmir under its illegal occupation. The Indian government noted, the so called order is yet another cosmetic exercise intended to camouflage Pakistan s illegal occupation.. 14 India s Concern on rising Sino-Pakistan Engagement in Gilgit-Baltistan The infrastructural and development projects undertaken jointly by the Pakistan and Chinese government in the Pakistan occupied Kashmir region have raised significant security concerns to the Indian State. The Karakoram highway, a 1300 kms long stretch of road connecting the strategic post of Kashgar in Xinjiang to Pakistan s capital, Islamabad have raised alarm in the Indian policy circle. Built through the formidable Karakoram- Himalayan mountain range, the highway brought about a major change in the strategic landscape of the region in favour of China and Pakistan. The highway not only provided a direct land link between these two countries, but also gave China access to the Indian Ocean region via a short land route. The highway passes via Gilgit, and goes to Nagar and Hunza, along the Hunza river ( Karim 2014:148). 15 It is popularly known as the Friendship Highway, and helps China achieve its strategic and economic goals in Afghanistan, Central Asia, Indian Ocean Region, the Persian Gulf, Middle East and Africa (Sering 2012:9). 16 Despite being termed as an economic project, the highway is far more than just a means of expanding commercial trade ties. It is believed that even the increased volume of trade does not make the project economically viable and therefore, the politico-strategic significance of the highway outweighs its economic and commercial considerations. The Morkhun-Khunjerab Pass-Qila Nabi road is perceived with great apprehension by the Indian State. The apprehension was expressed by Dinesh Singh, the then Minister for External Affairs of India in the Lok Sabha. He asserted: This road will help to extend the Chinese road network in the Tibet -Sinkiang area into Northern Kashmir. It will give easier access to Chinese troops from the areas under the illegal occupation of China in North East Kashmir and from Tibet into the Gilgit area in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, which lies to the north of the ceasefire line. The military significance of this road is, therefore, self evident. (Singh 1981:20) 17 Therefore, it was believed that this encirclement will seriously damper India s security interest in the region as in the event of any future Sino-Indian conflict, the Chinese forces can quickly be manoeuvred around from western-tibet to northern Kashmir, thereby leaving the areas north of Srinagar highly vulnerable. Presently, the two countries are expanding their strategic relations. Huge investments are made by the Chinese government in the Gilgit-Baltistan areas to expand the Karakoram corridor and build an expressway, railway line and oil and gas pipeline through it. The Karakoram highway expansion project 106 World Focus July 2017

107 is China s brainchild and is popularly known as the All weather expressway.the corridor development project costs $6 billion and links Central Asia and China to the Asian highway network, passing through Afghanistan and Iran. Furthermore, a 1,100 km long rail-link worth costing $ billion is suggested to be laid which will cut the distance between Pakistan capital Islamabad and China s trade centre Kashgar to a mere 17 hours. In addition, oil and gas pipelines will run across the corridor linking the existing fuellanes of Central Asia and China to refineries on Pakistani ports, and the middle east. The project also proposes to expand the network of feeder roads and bridges, widening the road to thrice its present specifications and enhancing the load carrying capacity by three times. The Indian State from the very outset has questioned the legitimacy of the projects undertaken in the disputed territory of Gilgit-Baltistan. India claims that the area occupied by Pakistan and ceded to China for the highway project is constitutionally a part of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir. Strategically critical, India raised objections to the construction of Karakoram highway in a disputed territory and objected to an increased presence of Chinese workers and troops in the region. Since most of the expansion projects in the area are carried out by Chinese companies and corporate houses, India fears the increased stronghold of China in the area and perceives it as its larger geo-strategic agenda of counter-balancing India in the South Asian region. Major concerns were raised by New Delhi as the multifarious projects carried in the POK area would strengthen Pakistan s position economically and strategically and would help it exert physical presence to counter India s claim over Gilgit-Baltistan. Moreover, the territory of Gilgit-Baltistan is an essential part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a multi-million dollar development project under China s larger One Belt One Road Initiative. The Belt and Road initiative is one of China s single most ambitious foreign policy initiative introduced in September-October It is perceived as a long term infrastructural development program with the objective of regional economic integration. The BRI has two major components: the land based Silk Road Economic Belt and the sea- based 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. The initiative concerns 65 countries and 4.4 billion people. Perceived as the most important economic and strategic initiative, it aims at promoting the development of three regions together; Asia, Europe, Middle east and North Africa. 18 China maintains that the project is an innovative method of cooperation in global governance in the face of a worsening economic climate and simmering geopolitical problems worldwide. Founded on the idea of building a new network of global partnerships, OBOR claims to provide a fresh way of thinking about regional and global cooperation, by including both bilateral and multilateral cooperation in political, economic, cultural and other fields. It envisions the creation of multiple economic corridors encompassing more than 60 countries linking the most dynamic East Asia Economic Zone with the advanced European Economic Zone. China propagates that the project is not for unilateral advantage but for the common prosperity and stability of the world. Chinese President Xi describes OBOR as a chorus, not a soloist singing. 19 One of the major project of the program in Asia has been the building of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. By April 2015, China and Pakistan had signed accords worth $ 46 billion to build the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor through Gilgit Baltistan. The development project aims at establishing a network of highways, railways, oil pipelines, fibre optic cables and special economic zones, linking the Chinese trading hub of Kashgar in Xinjiang province with the Pakistan port city of Gwadar in the Balochistan province, located near the strategic Straits of Hormuz. The area of Gilgit-Baltistan is paramount in the successful implementation of CPEC as it is the only land connection between Pakistan and China and all the roads and pipelines and most of the communication networks runs through this mountainous area. It will help the corridor extend till Gwadar port in Pakistan which will give China access to the Indian ocean and beyond.thus, both strategically and commercially, the access to Gwadar will enable China to gain immensely as the port on the Arabian sea shares a strategic location between South Asia, Central Asia and West Asia at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, just outside the Straits of Hormuz. Geo-Politics of Gilgit-Baltistan: India and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor 107

108 Proximity of China s Xinjiang to Gwadar will make trade for China cost-effective as the port is close to the Gulf, Central Asia, Europe and Africa. The port will also enable China to monitor the sea-lanes from the Persian Gulf as about 60% of Chinese energy requirements come from the Persian Gulf. Moreover, strategically the port can provide China the access to observe the Indian naval activities around the Persian Gulf and check the India-US domination of Indian Ocean. Whereas, on the other hand, the port will help Pakistan to monitor the Sea Lines of Communications (SLOCs) originating from the Persian Gulf (Malik:2012: 58). 20 However despite being strategically important to the CPEC, the region of Gilgit-Baltistan has been largely neglected and discriminated. In the recent visit to China for the One Belt One Road Forum (OBOR), the Chief Minister of Gilgit-Baltistan was not rendered any invitation; while the Chief Minister of all four provinces of Pakistan had accompanied PM Sharif to the summit. A large number of protesters gathered in Skardu raised concerns against the exploitative and discriminatory policies adopted by the Pakistan government in the area. 21 People are also disgruntled with some of the infrastructural and development projects undertaken in the area under CPEC. The construction of the Diamer-Bhasha dam in Gilgit-Baltistan has raised concerns amongst the local people. With storage capacity of about 8 million acre-feet (MAF) and projected electricity generation of 4,400 MW, the government had acquired land for the dam to meet the energy crisis in the country. 22 In the recent visit, Chinese government has agreed to support Pakistan on its biggest dam project in Gilgit-Baltistan and back its energy investments. 23 Though, despite acute electricity shortages, the dam is being opposed by people in Gilgit on the pretext that it would affect the social, economic and ecological balance in the region and would inundate 32 villages of the Diamer district in North areas, rendering thousands of people homeless. 24 Moreover, the residents of Kohistan district recently staged a protest complaining that the Gilani government is yet to relocate families whose houses come in the path of the dam or pay compensation for the loss of their land. 25 However, battling the opposition from the locals, CM Gilgit-Baltistan, Hafiz Hafeez-ur-Rehman recently announced that a 180 MW power generation project is approved under CPEC for Gilgit Baltistan. 26 The fate of GB is intertwined with the Kashmir issue in respect to the provision of constitutional rights and provincial autonomy. Though, with the coming of CPEC, other concerns such as the compensation for the acquisition of land too have loomed large. For example: under CPEC, one special economic zone is approved to be constructed in Gilgit-Baltistan over 250 acres land in Maqpoondaas where agro-based, minerals, livestock, handicrafts and wood related trades have been marked as potential industries. It is believed that CPEC can serve as a catalyst for the much needed institutional development in the region as the infrastructure development along with the institutional arrangements will bring the region in a better position to address the economic woes of the communities (Nigar 2017) 27 Though, apprehensions are that the area will be treated as a colony and the trade might be beneficial to the outsiders than to the locals. India and CPEC Indian government s stance on CPEC has been outright. It has publicly expressed its resolute disapproval on various occasions. Recently being formally invited by China to participate in the six separate forums as part of the Belt and Road project held in Beijing from May 14-16, 2017, India refused to send any representation. India maintains its long standing stance on opposing the projects undertaken by Pakistan and Chinese government in the disputed POK region. While refusing its participation, the Ministry of External Affairs official spokesperson, Gopal Baglay remarked, Connectivity projects must be pursued in a manner that respects sovereignty and territorial integrity. He further stated, connectivity initiatives must be based on universally recognised international norms, good governance, rule of law, opens transparency and equality. 28 Indian Ministers and officials at various platforms have repeatedly shown their discontent over the project. In his implicit remark on the CPEC, PM. Modi in his inaugural speech at the second Raisina Dialogue held in New Delhi postulated, Connectivity in itself cannot 108 World Focus July 2017

109 override or undermine the sovereignty of other nations. Only be respecting the sovereignty of countries involved, can regional connectivity corridors fulfil their promise and avoid differences and discord. 29 Whereas, Indian Foreign Secretary, S Jaishankar expressed his displeasure over the project by stating, China is very sensitive about its sovereignty. The economic corridor passes through an illegal territory, an area that we call Pakistan occupied Kashmir. You can imagine India s reaction at the fact that such a project has been initiated without consulting us 30 China however discredits India s concerns and noted, China has no intention of interfering in the territorial dispute between India and Pakistan. China has long believed that the two neighbours should solve their dispute through dialogue and consultations, and it has repeatedly emphasised that the construction of the CPEC would not affect its stance on the issue. It therefore considers India s concerns as unwarranted and proposed it to adopt an objective and more pragmatic attitude towards the One Belt, One Road proposal and see it as an open and inclusive regional integration program. 31 Reiterating along the same lines, Pakistan Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif remarked, the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor was open to all countries in the region and it must not be politicised. While directing his remark on growing India s apprehension, he emphasised that, One Belt One Road project negated the logic of polarisation and rejected the encirclement of any country. 32 In regard to the construction of the Diamer- Bhasha dam, India lodged protests with Pakistan as well as China to stop funding infrastructure project on a territory illegally occupied. MEA spokesperson, Vikas Swarup further noted, New Delhi opposes any development projects in POK, which is under forcible and illegal occupation. 33 A report published by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute observed that India s stance on CPEC is governed by three main drivers. Firstly,it runs through disputed territory; secondly, it holds doubts about CPEC s economic viability and subsequent anxiety about it being a geopolitical ploy; and thirdly China s overall stance regarding India on the Road Belt Initiative to date. It assessed that CPEC has security implications for India as it runs through territories that it disputes with Pakistan and China. India further claims that China is not respecting international law by allowing CPEC to run through disputed territory and therefore has a fundamental objection to it. The assertiveness and swiftness of Chinese actions in the South China Sea have implanted a preoccupation among China s critics in India that if China gains a foothold in the Arabian sea, and as an extension, in the Indian ocean through Gwadar, it might make national interest claims in India s maritime sphere too. 34 Hence, CPEC and greater involvement of China in the region has further intensified the already sour relations between India and Pakistan. Endnotes 1 Menon, V.P. (1955), The story of the Integration of the Indian States, Longmans, Green and Co: London. 2 Kalyanaraman, S. (2007), Dawn of Independence and the Tribal Raid, in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir:The Untold Story ed. Virendra Gupta and Alok Bansal, Manas Publications, New Delhi. 3 Stobdan, P (2007), Gilgit and Baltistan: The Historical Dimension, in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir:The Untold Story ed. Virendra Gupta and Alok Bansal, Manas Publications, New Delhi. 4 Snedden, Christopher (2015), Understanding Kashmir and Kashmiris, Hurst and Company, London. 5 Bansal, Alok (2007), Annexation of Gilgit-Baltistan: Tumultuous events of in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir:The Untold Story ed. Virendra Gupta and Alok Bansal, Manas Publications, New Delhi. 6 Zulfiqar Ali, Tariq Naqash, Jamil Nagri, Almost Pakistan: Gilgit-Baltistan in a constitutional limbo, Dawn, January 19, 2017, [Online: Web] Accessed February 16, 2017 URL: 7 Northern Areas of Pakistan-Facts, Problems and Recommendations (2004), Institute of Policy Studies, Vol 1 (1), p Sridhar, Seema (2008), Diamer-Basha and Mangla Dams: The Emerging water conflict in POK in The Last Colony: Muzaffarabad- Gilgit and Baltistan ed. P.Stobdan and D.Suba Chandran,India Research Press, New Delhi. 9 N.Areas, Kashmir division delinked: New power sharing formula, Dawn, October 24, 2002, [Online:Web] Accessed January 22, 2016 URL: Geo-Politics of Gilgit-Baltistan: India and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor 109

110 10 Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order 2009, Gilgit-Baltistan Legislative Assembly, [Online:Web] Accessed March 5, 2015 URL: gbla.gov.pk/page/governance-order 11 Autonomy order for Gilgit-Baltistan signed, Dawn, September 08, 2009, [Online:Web] Accessed March 4, 2016 URL: 12 China-Pak Boundary Agreement illegal: India, The Indian Express, July 15, 2009, [ Online: Web] Accessed April 15, 2016 URL: news/chinapak-boundary-agreement-illegal-india/489775/ 13 Noorani, A.G., Global Imbalances, Recovery and the East Asian Response: What we Know and What we do not know, The Sino-Pakistan Boundary Agreement, Pakistan Defence, April 25, 2014 [ Online: Web] Accessed February 10, 2017 URL: what-we-know-and What-we-do-not-know-the-sino-pakboundary-agreement / 14 Government of India protests to Pakistan against the Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order- 2009, Ministry of External Affairs, September 11, 2009 [Online: Web] Accessed August 10, 2015 URL: w w w. me a. go v. in / p r e s s -releas e s. h tm? d tl / / GOI_protests_to Pakistan_against_the_GilgitBaltistan Empowerment_ and_self_governance Order_ Karim, Afsir (2014), The Karakoram Himalayan Region: Geopolitical Perspective in The Other Kashmir: Society, Culture and Politics in the Karakoram Himalayas ed. K. Warikoo, Pentagon Press, New Delhi. 16 Sering, Senge (2012), Expansion of the Karakoram Corridor: Implications and Prospects, Lancers Books, New Delhi. 17 Singh, Gurnam (1981), The Karakoram Highway and its strategic implications for India, The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol 42(1), pp Jianmin, WU, One Belt and One Road, Far reaching Initiative, China-US Focus, March 26, 2015, [Online: Web] Accessed January 10, 2017 URL: 19 Yafei, He, Connecting the world through Belt and Road, China-US Focus, October 13, 2015, [Online:Web] Accessed January 11, 2017 URL: Malik, Hasan Yaser (2012), Strategic Importance of Gwadar Port, Journal of Political Studies, Vol 19 (2), pp Imtiaz Ali, Thousands protest government s negligence of Gilgit Baltistan under CPEC, Dawn, May 15, 2017 [Online:Web] Accessed May 15, 2017 URL: / 22 Pakistan, China likely to sign MoU on Diamer-Bhasha dam, The Nation, May 08, 2017 [Online: Web] Accessed May 09, 2017 URL: /pakistan-china-likely-to-sign-mou-on-diamerbhasha-dam 23 China backs Pakistan on POK dam ahead of Belt and Road Forum, India Today, May 13, 2017 [Online :Web] Accessed May 14, 2017 URL: story/china-pakistan-pok-belt-and-road-forum-summitdiamer-bhasha-dam-gilgit-baltistan-india/1/ html 24 Diamer- Bhasha dam: Risks and Controversies, Dawn, November 17, 2008 [Online:Web] Accessed April 10, 2017 URL: 25 Dipanjan Roy Chaudhury, Pakistan rebuffs India with Diamer-Bhasha Dam in POK, India Today, October 20, 2011 [Online:Web] Accessed April 10, 2017 URL: indiatoday.intoday.in/story/pakistan-rebuffs-india-withdiamer-bhasha-dam-in-pok/1/ html 26 Fawad, Masood, 180 MW power generation project approved under CPEC for GB: CM, Business Recorder, January 17, 2017 [Online:Web] Accessed April 10, 2017 URL: 27 Nigar, Neelum (2017), Establishing Special Economic Zones in Gilgit-Baltistan under CPEC, Institute of Strategic Studies. 28 Apurva, Shubhajit Roy, One Belt One Road: China- Pakistan warmth, India skips summit, The Indian Express, May 14, 2017 [Online:Web] Accessed May 14, 2017 URL: 29 Inaugural Address by Prime Minister at Second Raisina Dialogue, New Delhi, Ministry of External Affairs, January 17, 2017 [ Online:Web] Accessed February 14, 2017 URL: Inaugural_Address_by_Prime_Minister_at_Second_Raisina_Dialogue _New_Delhi_January_17_ Kallol, Bhattacherjee, Respect territorial sovereignty, India tells China, The Hindu, January 18, 2017 [Online: Web] Accessed March 16, 2017 URL: India tells China/article ece 31 Yu Ning, India should have an open mind toward CPEC, Global Times, February 23, 2017 [Online:Web] Accessed May 10, 2017 URL: content/ shtml 32 CPEC must not be politicised, says Sharif, Dawn, May 15, 2017 [Online:Web] Accessed May 17, 2017 URL: =15_05_2017_001_ India against infrastructure projects in POK:MEA, The Indian Express, October 24, 2015 [Online:Web] Accessed May 10, 2017 URL: article/india/india-news-india/india-against-infrastructureprojects-in-pok-mea/ 34 Ghiasy, Richard and Jiayi Zhou (2017), The Silk Road Economic Belt: Considering security implications and EU- China cooperation prospects, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. 110 World Focus July 2017

111 State Sponsored Terrorism in India: Why India s Conducted Surgical Strikes in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir? Afroz Ahmad & Jahangir Ahmad Khan Introduction India s experiences with state sponsor terrorism, like other countries in the South Asian region, can also be broadly divided into external and internal terrorism. External largely covers state sponsor terrorism, concerns with cross-border terrorism perpetrated by Indian neighbouring countries especially terrorist groups based in Pakistan with connections to Al- Qaeda. More recently, the appearance of support groups based in Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka has resulted in the spread of terrorism from specific locale to urban centres in India. 1 India has faced state sponsor terrorism since gaining its independence from the British. Pakistan s propensity for using non-state actors as proxies to fight its war goes back to 1947 and the founding of the Pakistani state, and has continued to the present. 2 Terrorism across the border has provided the conventional and nuclear balance between India and Pakistan irrelevant. The US government believes that Pakistan also funds, trains and equips militant groups and supports their asymmetric strategies. Apart from an ongoing covert war in Kashmir, Pakistan s Inter- Services Intelligence (ISI) also supported insurgent groups in Punjab seeking an independent Khalistan state from There exists a strong link between the growing spread of militancy and terrorism in South Asia to the Afghan war in the 1980s, which saw a corresponding upsurge in US aid and Saudi funneling of arms to the anti-soviet guerrillas through Pakistan s ISI agency. During the Afghanistan war the ISI created a string of training camps along the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir mainly with Saudi funding, to turn out religiously motivated students, in what later became characterized as an assembly line of gun-fodder for the mujahidin. 4 Terrorism in India till the 1980s was confined to the Northeast tribal region where separatists had raised flags of revolt against the Indian Union. The insurgencies in the north east were localized and attacks were launched mainly against the Indian security forces. 5 India faced its first state sponsor terrorism in Punjab. The terrorism in Punjab was active for over a decade broadly, from A segment of Sikhs here demanded Khalistan independent state. Terrorism was used as the main instrument to challenge the government and coerce the local population including the sizeable number of Hindu. The movement was assisted by Pakistan, which provided its arm logistic support and safe havens. The Sikh diaspora based in Canada and other countries were also a source of found and moral support. Sikh militants based in Canada blew up the Indian passenger plane Kanishka, claiming the lives of 329 people the largest number of people killed in a single attack in India so far. The terrorist violence supported by external countries here posed multiple long term threats to India s territorial integrity, national unity and secular culture. The new kind of violence was a potent mix of unconventional warfare state sponsor terrorism. Several terrorist groups called Jihadi operating against India are based in Pakistan and Bangladesh, with their planning cells and modules located in other neighbouring countries too. In demographic and religious mosaic that is South Asian ethnic and religious groups are able to move freely across international border and merge with the local population. 6 Jammu and Kashmir problem can be traced to the partition of the country science independence The partition of the country in 1947 may be the origin of the Kashmir crisis, but it is not the only cause of the continuing conflict in the Jammu and Kashmir, rather it is the failure of democratic institutions that has alienated the people in the state and perpetuated the conflict. 7 The decade of 1980s marked the beginning of an anti-india insurgency and separatist movement with a deeply flawed unemployment amongst educated youth, rampant corruption, and rigging of the 1987 election to the State Assembly resulted in deterioration of the law and order situation. 8 State Sponsored Terrorism in India: Why India s Conducted Surgical Strikes in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir? 111

112 India s neighbor took advantage of the situation, and began to arm and train Kashmiri youths who crossed over the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir Line of Control for training in insurgency operations against India. The Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), a militant separatist movement, was initially responsible for all political violence and insurgency in Kashmir. There is a common belief among terrorist groups that India is harming Muslims and Muslim interests. Terrorists have used an essentially nationalistic conflict and morphed it into a pan-islamic jihad, a religious war with global implications. 9 With this dimension terrorism has become a way of life in South Asia, inflicting destruction on the civilian population and property, and bringing about unprecedented misery. Being wedged between authoritarian states or fledgling democracies engaged in breach of international law by exporting terrorism, narcotics and fake currency, India since the 1980s has been fighting a proxy war in the Indian part of Kashmir with Islamic militants and groups committed to the cause of liberating Kashmir. 10 The Jammu and Kashmir has been affected by terrorist and secessionist violence, sponsored and supported from across the border, for more than two and half decades. Since the advent of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir in 1990, Civilians and 4,946 Security Force personnel have lost their lives up to December State sponsored terrorism continues to bleed Jammu and Kashmir. This state has witnessed an average of eight terror-related incidents per day during the past 25 years. As many as 18,938 civilians and security forces have been killed in over 69,395 terrorism-related incidents across the state since while around 21,800 terrorists have been gunned down in encounters with security forces during this period of turmoil and bloodshed. The highest number of terrorism related incidents was recorded in year 1995 when the state saw 5,938 such incidents, followed closely by 5,829 terror incidents in However, the number of terror incidents has and civilian casualties have recorded a declining trend since 2006 and 2007 respectively. Only 170 incidents, the lowest-ever in past 25 years, were witnessed in A total of 4,946 security forces have lost their lives in counter-terrorism operation during the past 25 years. According to the Indian Home Ministry records, security forces suffered most in 2001 when 536 of them were killed, followed by 453 in But the damage suffered by forces has been significantly reduced since 2012 when only 15 security forces lost their lives. In this concern most of the security analysts and academicians uttered that after the cessation of US aid to the Mujahideen fighters following the withdrawal of the Soviets from Afghanistan, huge caches of arms remained with the Northern Alliance and the ubiquitous Pakistani ISI Agency, which were subsequently used to arm the jihad. 11 Such analysts asserted that jihadist organizations affiliated to the International Islamic Front (IIF) had been active in Jammu and Kashmir since Since 1998 Al- Qaeda imprint was felt in India in the form of jihadist suicide terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. Al-Qaeda s modus operandi in terms of use of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), fidayeen suicide attacks, self-fabricated explosives, use of the internet (for communication, propaganda and other operational purposes), and use of mobile phones as trigger devices, all became visible in India. Also the selection of soft targets, civilians, economic and strategic infrastructure, was seen as being akin to the Al-Qaeda mode of operation. The indigenous insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir that was initially spearheaded by the JKLF and the Hizbul Mujahideen losing steam in the mid 1990s, the ISI seized the opportunity to prop up Pakistan-based groups like Harkat-ul-Ansar, LeT, and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) in an attempt to escalate the proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir. 12 By doing so, the ISI also took control of the insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir. Well-trained terrorist training camps run by the ISI and located in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, in Muzaffarabad, Kotli, Chinari, Mirpur, Gilgit, Diamer and various parts of the Neelum Valley operatives from these groups had no particular affinity for Jammu and Kashmir. They switched roles effortlessly between insurgent actions while infiltrating into Jammu and Kashmir through tough Indian defences along the Line of Control (LOC), melting away into the semi-urban landscape of the Kashmir Valley and waiting for an opportunity to perpetrate acts of terrorism. 13 In the post 9/11 period, while the main focus of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda was to take on the might of the US. The ISI managed to exploit the situation and the period between 2001 to World Focus July 2017

113 saw a massive induction of what the Indian Army called Foreign Terrorists (FT) into Jammu and Kashmir, with many of them managing to move out of Jammu and Kashmir and into the Indian hinterland. 14 The two deadliest terrorist groups in 2015 in India were LeT and Hizbul Mujahideen, which are also were operating in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. LeT mainly operates in Pakistan and was responsible for 22 deaths in Hizbul Mujahideen, an allegedly based in Pakistan, has been responsible for fewer deaths since its peak in The group was responsible for 30 deaths in 2013, which fell to 11 the following year and to seven deaths in Trained militants belonging to the Lashkare-Taiba, Hizbul Mujahideen, Harkat ul Mujahideen, Jeish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and others are given protection and logistical support by the Pakistani army until they are sent across the LoC in batches of five to ten. The Pakistani army also maintains many terrorist camps across the border in Pakistan and has launching pads available in the Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir that keeps small groups of terrorist waiting for infiltration into Indian controlled Jammu and Kashmir. 15 Pakistan-assisted infiltration across the LoC tends to succeed in effecting penetration into India. The terrorists, trained in guerrilla warfare, manage to hide in the dense vegetation and when detected and engaged they often manage to escape into the hinterland after hours and days of exchange of gunfire with the security forces. 16 Uri Attack On the 18 September 2016, in the early morning, four terrorists entered an Indian Army Camp in the town of Uriof Uri in Jammu and Kashmir. The terrorists - also known as Fedayeen- appeared to be well trained and heavily armed. They had automatic weapons, grenade launcher attachments and other equipment. In the several hours of exchange of fire between the security forces and the terrorists, 18 Indian soldiers were killed, 30 injured and all four terrorists were killed in action. However, despite the fact that no group has claimed responsibility for the attack, there are several indications that the terrorists belong to Pakistan-based armed group JeM. 17 There are allegations, that JeM, a militant group that has been active in Kashmir for more than 15 years, have links to elements within the Pakistani government. Regarding India s Army Northern Command and several statements of civilian authorities, the evidence collected at the scene indicated the attackers were foreign and their equipment fool Pakistani markings. This proves that the entire operation was planned and executed by Pakistan and shows that, once again, Pakistan has not stopped using terrorism as a tool of foreign policy.moreover The Uri attack was not the first Pakistani sponsored terrorism, India has victims several time Pakistani sponsored terrorism especially ISI sported terrorist group. 18 Thus, the Uri attack was not the first terrorist attack under the BJP led- Narendra Modi government. There have been two other major terrorist attacks on Indian soil since the government cameinto power in May The first attack was in Punjab where three civilians and fourpolicemen were killed in the Gurdaspur district. A more disturbing one took place injanuary 2016 when terrorists targeted one of India s most important air force bases in Pathankot in Punjab. 19 Here, the core question that needs to be answered is: why did the Indi Conducted Surgical Strikes in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir after the Uri attacks? What made the governmentof India so complacent that it did not take any action in the wake of the previous attacks? This factor of different responses to the similar kinds of attacks needs to be answered.important think history shows that for the last ten years all the terrorist attacks that have taken place havetargeted civilians and non-military areas. However, the last three recent terrorist attackshave focussed on military areas and presumably show a new area of focus. The attack in Uri cannot be just passed off as any other terrorist attack, as it has larger ramifications and canbe seen as a threat to the sovereignty to India. Destruction of military assets is a directthreat to the military prowess of India. Surgical strikes Uri attack following the death of 18 solders, national and international community, keenly watch how Narendra Modi s government response for this attack. The India s quick response to the Uri attack has followed privies pattern anger against the enemy, and the condom of the state sponsored terrorist the deep state represented by the Pakistan based terrorist group. The first response, home minister Rajnath State Sponsored Terrorism in India: Why India s Conducted Surgical Strikes in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir? 113

114 Singh, has criticized Pakistan, called it a terrorist state and immediately cancelled his visit to the US and Russia, then PM Modi has assured the nation that the perpetrators of this despicable attack will be punished. 20 But other side the death of solders the righteous national anger and public opinion was against to government palpable. The pressure of the Modi government to take action agents the perpetrators of Uri attack. In response to Modi Government launched surgical strikes on terrorist bases along the LoC, Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir after 11 days of Uri attack have brought about a sigh of relief for the Modi government. 21 Consequently, the government s response to the Uri attack is grounded in real politics and provides the government with realistic options and leverage. Other pressure of the Modi Government is also to punish the perpetrators of Uri attack. Actually the pressure of Modi Government upcoming UP and Punjab state elections, before election (especially Uttar Pradesh elections as the BJP was already on the back foot) because the death of soldiers in Uri attack most of the Hindi regions especially the UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Punjab. The anger and unrest were coming out against Modi government from entire India. According to Samita Gupta (Deputy Editor at The Hindu in Delhi), she witnessed a discussion where a man named Ganesh Shankar Yadav said that diplomatic measures and tough speeches in the United Nation (UN). won t help Pakistan reform, adding, Modi ji should show us that he really has a 56 inch chest. If the United State can enter into other countries territories and shoot down terrorists, why can t we? Otherwise, he is taking a risk in these elections. These states were play to very important role come to power of the Modi Government in 2014 parliament election. But last one year government loses the public faith especially Dalit and minority community. So, the anguish of the people and criticism of Modi s policy towards Pakistan put the incumbent Modi government on the spot and consequently, action had to be taken to satiate the public demand for revenge. This has also led to a sense of satisfaction among the voters, many of whom would be voting in Uttar Pradesh. However pressure to the Modi government reperformance again archived to vote bank in UP. BJP leader, on the ground, the party assesses that the 114 World Focus July 2017 surgical strikes in the would not only boost Modi s image as a leader, who walked the talk and punished the perpetrators of Uri attack, he also help the BJP gain an upper hand in the upcoming state elections, especially in Uttar Pradesh. Some of BJP leaders in Uttar Pradesh made government action a campaigning tool and praised India s surgical strike in several banners and hoardings. The State is expected to go to the Assembly polls in less than four months; in Uttar Pradesh, hoardings state: We will kill you and kill you for sure but with our gun, our bullet, at our time of convenience but at your place. Photos of the hoardings were showing PM Narendra Modi, BJP Chief Amit Shah, Uttar Pradesh BJP Keshav Prasad Maurya and others. The posters then congratulate the government and the army for the offensive.above discussion clearly indicates that state sponsored terrorism is very active in India. Especially the Pakistan sponsored terrorist groups like: Harkat-ul- Mujahideen (HuM) Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM), Lashkar-e-Tayiba (LeT), and Jaish-e-Mohammed, are supported by Pakistan s ISI and these groups have established training campus in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). According Indian Government official reports more than 55 terrorist camps are active in PoK. Government officials said that at least 20 new terrorist camps have come up in the last four months. Endnote 1 B. Raman, (2006) Global Terrorism: India s Concerns, Papers South Asia Analysis Group (SAAG), No. 2021, 12 November Chellaney, B. (2001) Terrorism in Southern Asia: Lessons of History, International Security. 26: (3) Asthana, Vandana (2010) Cross-Border Terrorism in India: Counterterrorism Strategies and Challenges, ACDIS Occasional Paper, Department of Government and International Affairs Eastern Washington University 4 Gregory, S. (2007) The ISI and the War on Terrorism, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. 30: (12) Afsir Karim (2009) Terrorism: the Indian experience Edited by Maroof Raza confronting terrorism; Londan: Penguin group. 6 Ibid 7 Marwah, Ved (2003) India s internal security challenges, Strategic Analysis, 27:(4), , 8 Jamwal, N.S. (2003) Counter terrorism strategy, Strategic Analysis, 27: (1), Weaver, M. A. (2002) Pakistan: In the Shadow of Jihad and Afghanistan, New York: Farrar, Staus and Giroux. 10 Asthana, Vandana (2010) Cross-Border Terrorism in India: Counterterrorism Strategies and Challenges, ACDIS Occasional Paper, Department of Government and International Affairs Eastern Washington University 11 Mennessier, Claire (2015) Financing Terror, Part II: Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism, STRIFE Accessed at 12 Subramaniam, Arjun (2012) Challenges of Protecting India From Terrorism, Terrorism and Political Violence, 24: (3) Ibid 14 B. Raman, (2002) Al Qaeda Empire in Pakistan and Spurt in Terrorism in Kashmir South Asia Analysis Group. 29 November The Hindu (2015), Pakistan supported, trained terror groups: Musharraf, news/international/south-asia/pakistan-supported-trained-terror-groups-like-lashkaretaiba-pervezmusharraf/article ece 16 SADF (2016) Pakistan s cross-border terrorism The Pathankot attack, Policy Brief paper, South Asia Democratic Forum. 17 Ahmad, afroz and Sunil Kaumar (2016) Surgical strikes seem to Kill two birds with one stone for Modi Government, South Asia Democratic Forum (SADF), Comment at uploads/2016/10/comment.n.43.kumar_.pdf 18 Ibid 19 Inid 20 C. Uday Bhaskar (2016) Uri attack: Pressure on Modi govt to act decisively now is visible, but must be well thought through, The Indian Express, uri-uri-attack-jawans-killed-kashmir1-attack-pm-narendra-modi-india-pakistan-relation Harsh V Pant (2016) Why Modi took 11 days to order surgical strikes against Pakistan, Daily open, 1/13171.html

115 Contrasting Development: A Study of Economic Realities of India and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) Introduction Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) has been a major issue of incongruity between India and Pakistan since partition. PoK is commonly known in Pakistan as Azad Kashmir (which lies to the west of the India s state of Jammu and Kashmir) and Gilgit-Baltistan. While India refers these areas as Pakistan occupied Kashmir, United Nations and other international organisations refer to these areas as Pakistan administered Kashmir. The Line of Control (LoC) refers to the military control line which separates India and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). There have been numerous unresolved conflicts between India and Pakistan over Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) since the first Kashmir war as it is called, was fought in between these two newly built nations over the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Both, India and Pakistan were at war with each other in the years 1965, 1971 and The hostile relationship between India and Pakistan due to Pakistan occupied Kashmir has grown sour over the years and has resulted in immense loss of life and resources on both sides. This paper discusses the economic realities of India and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (Pok) in the continuous environment of heightened tension which hampers growth and development of both these area. India has come a long way since independence and has become one of the major economies in the world today whereas on the other hand, the development path of Pakistan occupied Kashmir has not been so impressive. India and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK): A Historical Perspective On the sidelines of the recently held World Economic Forum 2017 at Davos, Pakistan s ex-army Chief General Raheel Sharif termed Kashmir as the unfinished agenda of Pakistan. This is reminiscent of the August of 1994 when former Pakistan Prime Parul Khatri & Charu Khatri Minister Benazir Bhutto, during Pakistan s Independence Day celebrations, had termed Kashmir the unfinished task of partition. In response, on the following day, during India s Independence Day celebrations, the-then Indian Prime Minister PV Narsimha Rao had rightly pointed out that the only unfinished task of partition was Pakistan-Occupied- Kashmir. The August of 1947 witnessed a gory partition, but what it also brought along was a partition perhaps one of the most haphazardly done in the history of mankind. Largely drawn as an imaginary line by Cyril Radcliffe, who by profession was neither an administrator nor a cartographer, the Radcliffe Line divided not only land but also people, while sowing seeds of further division in the hearts and minds of people on both sides. The-then ruler of Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh, though initially choosing to remain independent, was later driven towards integrating the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir with the Union of India. Unable to defend his kingdom against several thousand Pashtun raiders aiming to overthrow his rule, Maharaja Hari Singh signed an Instrument of Accession on October 24, 1947, handing over control of defence, external affairs and communications to the Government of India in return for military aid. Even as the armies of India and Pakistan fought each other, the two areas of control stabilised around what is now known as the Line of Control. As the chain of events unfolded post the uprising against Maharaja Hari Singh in the spring of 1947, India approached the United Nations for resolving the Kashmir dispute. The military representatives of India and Pakistan met together in Karachi from 18 July to 27 July 1949 under the auspices of the Truce Sub-committee of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan. While the UN resolution did pass in favour of holding a plebiscite in Kashmir, the plebiscite hasn t been held till date because of non- Contrasting Development: A Study of Economic Realities of India and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) 115

116 fulfilment of precondition requiring withdrawal of the Pakistani army along with the non-state elements. Originally known as the Cease Fire Line, it was redesignated as the Line of Control (LoC) post the historic Shimla Agreement of As part of Shimla Agreement, both the Governments agreed that the Line of Control (LoC) resulting from cease fire on 17th December, 1971 shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of either side. While the Line of Control (LoC) is not a legally recognised international boundary, it continues to be the defacto border between India and Pakistan, dividing the erstwhile princely State of Jammu and Kashmir into what today forms part of the Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir and the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The problem of Kashmir has long moved beyond traditional geostrategy, transcending into the realms of history, economy and sociology among others. A comparison of Economic Development in India and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) on various aspects: Total Geographical Area India is the seventh largest country in the world, with a total area of 3,287,263 square kilometres (1,269,219 sq. miles) divided into 29 states and 7 union territories. The total area under Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) is 13,297 square kilometres (5,134 sq. Miles). Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) is divided into three divisions (Mirpur, Muzaffarabad, Poonch) which are further divided into ten districts. These districts include Mirpur, Kotli, Bhimber, Muzaffarabad, Jhelum valley, Neelam, Poonch,Haveli, Bagh and Sudhanoti.Gilgit-Baltistan covers an area of over 72,971 square kilometers (28,174 sq miles) and is highly mountainous. In 2015, the estimated population of the area was 1,800,000. Population Population of an area can be an asset or a liability for the area depending upon the quality of population and development of other basic facilities and its distribution amongst the population. Human resource is one of the most important resource which helps in the development of an area. India is a vast country with second highest population in the world after China, though it is projected to surpass China by 2022 and become the most populous country in the world. India s population was recorded as billion in 2015 which shows the increasing rate at which population is growing in the country. The population of Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) in 2015 was recorded at million and that for Pakistan was million. The population growth rate for India was 1.2% in 2015 while it was 2.41 % for Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir). According to the World Bank data, Population density (people per sq. km of land area) in India was 441 in 2015 whereas it was 336 for Azad Kashmir ( Pakistan occupied Kashmir) as reported by Planning and Development Department, Azad Govt. of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Per Capita Income Per capita income or average income measures the average income earned per person in a given area (city, region, country, etc.) in a specified year. It is calculated by dividing the area s total income by its total population. The per capita income of India in the year 2015 was 1,593.3 US dollars compared to the per capita income of Azad Kashmir ( Pakistan occupied Kashmir) which was recorded as 1512 US dollars while for Pakistan it was 1,434.7 US dollars in the same year. Education Literacy and education level attained in a society reflect its economic as well as social development. The literacy rate as defined by the Census of India 1991, is the total percentage of the population of an area at a particular time aged seven years or above who can read and write with understanding. Literacy rate for India has increased from 18.33% in 1951 to 74.04% in The literacy rate in India administered Jammu and Kashmir was recorded as 68.74% in the Census of 2011.This shows the tremendous socioeconomic growth in India despite a high increase in its population and other hindrances in its development process. On the other hand, Education has been a priority of the Govt. of the state of Azad Jammu & Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) as about 30% of its total recurring budget, besides, 7% of the total 116 World Focus July 2017

117 development budget is allocated to this sector. As a result of this substantial investment, literacy rate is has increased over the years, from 62% in to 77% in 2015, which was apparently higher than in any other region in Pakistan (60%). The gross enrolment rate at primary level among boys was 115% while for girls it was 105% in The gross enrolment rate at primary level in India administered Jammu and Kashmir was % in The gross enrolment rate for boys was 98.9% and for girls 101.4% in in India. According to the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, for Higher Education, there were 43 Central universities, 316 State Public universities,122 Deemed universities, 181 State Private universities,1 Central Open university and 13 State Open universities till 2015 in India. In Pakistan occupied Kashmir (Pok) or Azad Kashmir, Mirpur University of Science and Technology, University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Al-Khair University, University of Poonch, Women University of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, University of Management Sciences and Information Technology are among a few universities which are recognised by Higher Education Commission of Pakistan. Agriculture Historically, the economy of both, India and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) have been predominantly agricultural economies. In India, agriculture still continues to be the most important source of employment. The agriculture and allied sector are one of the largest contributors to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of India. They continue to be pivotal to the sustainable growth and development of the Indian economy. India is the largest producer, consumer and exporter of spices and spice products. India is the largest producer of milk and dairy products, mangoes, coconuts, bananas, pulses, turmeric, ginger, black pepper and cashew nuts. India s fruit production has grown faster than vegetables, making it the second largest fruit producer in the world. The agricultural sector covers around 43% of India s total geographical area. About 58% of the rural households depend on agriculture for their livelihood. According to the report of Planning and Development Department, Azad Govt. of the State of Jammu and Kashmir,( Pakistan occupied Kashmir) in 2015,the area under cultivation is around 1,940,82 hectares, which accounts for 13% of the total Geographical area. Out of this area, 92% of the cultivable area is rain-fed. About 87% households have very small land holdings which ranges between one to two acres. The major crops are Maize, Wheat & Rice whereas minor crops are Grams, Pulses (Red Kidney Beans), Vegetables and Oil-seeds. Major fruits produced in Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) are Apple, Pears, Apricot and Walnuts. Agriculture and livestock income ranges between 30-40% of household earnings. Industry In 1947, after India achieved independence from Britain, the industrial base was weak and under developed. Development of the industrial sector was thus crucial for India s overall growth and development. Hence, with the introduction of 2nd five year plan, which was based on Mahalanobis Model, this sector was accorded the top priority. Since then the industrial sector has seen tremendous growth in India. Iron and steel industry was the most important industry which received top priority. Jute industry is one of the oldest in the country. India is the largest producer of jute products in the world. Cotton and Synthetic textile industries, food processing industry, sugar industry, cement industry, petrochemical industry, fertilizer industry, etc. have been established in India. So far, the Indian Government has formulated five industrial policies (Industrial Policy 1948,1956,1977,1980 and 1991) to develop the industrial sector. New Economic Policy of 1991 which was based on Liberalisation, Privatisation and Globalisation has helped India in achieving high industrial growth. Make in India campaign aims at boosting up the manufacturing sector and taking India on a sustainable growth path. The Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) have also contributed significantly in the growth of India s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and have also generated employment opportunities for the people. The small scale sector accounts for over 80% of the manufacturing sector s employment Contrasting Development: A Study of Economic Realities of India and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) 117

118 level. It contributes around 39% of the total industrial production. The Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) Government had adopted the Industrial policy of Federal Govt. according to which all types of industries were allowed to be established in the territory of Azad Kashmir except arms & ammunition, security printing, explosive material and radioactive material. A total of 6 industrial estates have been set up in various districts of Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) in order to increase the pace of growth and development in the region. They have been provided with the basic infrastructure like roads, electricity, water supply and sewerage system. A total number of 1970 medium and large scale industries have already been established in the region. Industries established in Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) include wood and furniture, tyre and rubber factory, textile mills, steel works, plastic industries, etc. There is huge potential for Industries like Food, Hydro power generation equipments, readymade garments, furniture and plastic products in the area. The traditional handicraft industry of Kashmir also has huge potential for growth and development. In 1992, an official body, Azad Kashmir Small Industries Corporation (AKSIC) was established to promote the development of handicrafts in the region. Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) is god gifted in terms of resources and hence the development of handicrafts industry is of huge importance for this region. Unemployment Unemployment is a phenomenon that occurs when a person who is actively searching for employment is unable to find work at current wage rate. Unemployment is measured using the the unemployment rate, which is the number of unemployed people divided by the total labour force. Unemployment rate reflects the economic health of the nation and is thus an important indicator of development. In a growing economy, the level of employment and unemployment both become important. According to the data of Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, the unemployment rate at all India level in was 5%. The unemployment rate among females was significantly higher than their male counterparts. In India administered state of Jammu and Kashmir, the unemployment rate was 7.2%. The unemployment rate for Azad Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) was 14.4% in 2015, as per the data of Planning and Development Department, Azad Govt. of the State of Jammu and Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir). The unemployment rate in Pakistan in 2015 was 6%. Health Health services have improved in India which is reflected by various indicators including life expectancy, infant mortality rate, etc. According to World Health Organisation (WHO), life expectancy which refers to the average life of the people of the country, is 67 years for males and 70 years for females in Although there has been improvement in life expectancy since independence, India is still behind many countries like USA, Canada, Australia, Sweden, etc. which have high life expectancy. According to the data published by Ministry of Health and Family welfare, Department of AYUSH, total number of hospitals under AYUSH system in 2013 were 3167 with a total of 57,056 hospital beds. The health facilities available in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) are still considered inadequate in comparison to the requirements of the people.. At the time of independence, only 30 hospital beds and 11 dispensaries were available in the area. In 2015, approximately 3855 hospital beds were available in the area averaging one bed per 1158 people.the total number of Doctors, including administrative doctors, health managers and dentists were 1078 out of which there are 57 health managers,76 dental surgeons and 826 medical officers/specialists, giving an average 0.18 per 1000 population in respect of medical officers/specialists, per 1000 Population in respect of dentists and per 1000 population, in respect of health Managers. Primary health services are available to 57% of the population. This data shows that since independence, there has been development in the health sector but it still lacks the level which is required to fulfil the basic requirements of the people of the area. 118 World Focus July 2017

119 Foreign Assistance in India and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) After independence, both India and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) were underdeveloped areas suffering from huge capital shortage which was needed to develop their respective areas. The level of income as well as level of capital accumulation was low. Foreign assistance and aid was thus needed to bridge this gap. The World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), Asian Development Bank are among the various international organisations which have provided funds to the under developed regions to help them in their development process. Foreign capital inflow to the country can be either in the form of concessional assistance or nonconcessional assistance. Concessional assistance includes the grants and loans which can be obtained for long term duration at very low rate of interest. Non-concessional assistance includes External Commercial borrowings (ECBs), Non Resident Indian (NRI) deposits, loans on market terms and foreign investment. Foreign investment is generally in the form of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) or Foreign Institutional Investment (FII) which shows private foreign participation in different sectors of the economy. India has received assistance from all the major organisations including the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), etc. The World Bank Group s Partnership Strategy for India ( ) will help India in laying the foundations of sustainable and inclusive growth in the country. The World Bank Group will assist India through an integrated package which includes financing, advisory services and knowledge. During the World Bank financial year (July 2013-June 2014), funding assigned for India was $5.2 billion ($2.0 billion in International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), $3.1 billion in International Development Association and $0.1 billion in CTF or Clean Technology Fund) across 16 projects. Some of the ongoing projects include: Innovate in India for Inclusiveness This is an active project which was approved by the World Bank Group on May 31, 2017 with the commitment amount of US$ 125 million out of the total project cost of US $ 250 million. The closing date is June 30, National Hydrology Project This is an active project which aims to improve the extent, quality and accessibility of water resources information and also to strengthen the capacity of targeted water resources management institutions in India. The project was approved on March 15, 2017 with the commitment amount of US $ 175 million out of the total project cost of US $ 350 million. The closing date is March 31, Additional Financing for Second Elementary Education Project This project was approved on March 18, 2010 with the commitment amount of US $ 750 million out of the total project cost of US $ 8400 million. There are various other projects which are assisted by World Bank Group in India. Some of these include Sustainable Livelihoods and Adaptation to Climate Change, India Development Marketplace 2014, Skills Strengthening for Industrial Value Enhancement Operation, North Eastern Region Power System Improvement Project, Technical Education Quality Improvement Project III, Tejaswini: Socioeconomic Empowerment of Adolescent Girls & Young Women,etc. India joined the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on December 27, 1945 as one of its original members. India has not been a frequent user of IMF funding but the assistance from IMF has been instrumental in helping India in solving its Balance of Payment (BOP) on two occasions ( and ). In recent years, the IMF has provided technical assistance to India in a number of areas which include the development of the government securities market, foreign exchange market reform, public expenditure management, tax and customs administration, and strengthening statistical systems in connection with the Special Data Dissemination Standards. Asian Development Bank (ADB) has also assisted India in various projects. These include India: Rajasthan State Highway Investment Program - Tranche 1, Solar Transmission Sector Project, Strengthening Climate Change Resilience in Urban India - Supporting Climate Change-Resilient Smart Contrasting Development: A Study of Economic Realities of India and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) 119

120 Cities Mission Projects (Subproject 2), Madhya Pradesh Skills Development Project, Expanding Micro and SME Lending in Semi-Urban and Rural Areas Project, Low-Cost Affordable Housing Finance, etc. Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) has received foreign assistance and aid from various international organisations as well as individual countries. Some of them are mentioned below: Asian Development Bank Azad Jammu and Kashmir, commonly known as Azad Kashmir forms a major part of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) along with the region of Gilgit- Baltistan. The area of Azad Kashmir received assistance of US$ million from Asian Development Bank (ADB) under the Project Multi Sector Rehabilitation Project for Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The agenda was inclusive economic growth of this region. This project provided funds for development in various sectors including Education, Health, Transport, etc. US Agency for International Development (USAID) US Agency for International Development (USAID) aims at ending extreme poverty and promoting the development of resilient, democratic societies. They provide funds to countries to help them realise their potential. USAID had assisted in the development of the area of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) with the total amount of US $ 3, USAID programs are implemented in the areas of Pakistan, with major focus on under-represented geographic areas which include Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit- Baltistan. Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD), Canada Canada s bilateral relationship with Pakistan focuses on Education, women empowerment, improved governance among other focus areas. Canada works in all geographical areas of Pakistan as well as Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK). In June 2013, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) were merged together and a new organisation named Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD) was formed. DFATD had assisted the area of Azad Jammu and Kashmir with the total budget of CDN $ 20 million. Germany Pakistan was one of Germany s first partner countries in the development cooperation. Individual measures are also carried out by Germany in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) areas of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. The areas of cooperation between Germany and Pakistan include Governance, Energy, Education and Health. In recent years, the Diamer-Bhasha Dam Project with the budget of US $ 14 billion has become a major prestige project for Pakistan in the Giligit- Baltistan area of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). This project was conceived in and since then, India has been continuously protesting against Pakistan. In 2014, The World Bank had refused to be the co-financer for this project after India s refusal to give No Objection Certificate (NOC) to Pakistan for this Hydel Power Project. As a major setback to Pakistan, in 2016, The Asian Development Bank (ADB) denied funds to Pakistan for this project. India has been constantly opposing to funding of any project for the development of infrastructure in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) comprising the areas of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit- Baltistan. India has argued that Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) is the territory of India which was illegally occupied by Pakistan. The decision of ADB may strengthen India s case against multilateral as well as bilateral funding of Infrastructure Projects in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). Conclusion The relationship between the South Asian neighbouring countries of India and Pakistan since independence and partition in 1947 has been hostile over the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan calls the Indian government administered State of Jammu and Kashmir as India occupied Kashmir whereas India calls the Pakistan administered State of Jammu and Kashmir as Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Almost 70 years have passed since independence but this issue still remains unresolved. Even in the near future, 120 World Focus July 2017

121 there seems to be no hope for this issue getting resolved. Amidst all the bloodshed and tension, both the areas of Jammu and Kashmir (one with India and the other with Pakistan), which are blessed with natural beauty and resources, have shown signs of development in almost all sectors including agriculture, industry, health, etc. Tourism Industry has provided livelihood to many households in both the regions despite continuous cross border terrorism and a gruesome history. Terrorist activities in the state of Jammu and Kashmir have increased over the years which has proved to be a major hindrance in the growth process. It has huge devastating impact on the infrastructure of the area, besides disturbing the normal way of life in the region. India has always claimed that Pakistan has continuously supported and carried out terrorist activities in the State of Jammu and Kashmir by funding terrorist groups and providing them training and resources. On the other hand, Pakistan has denied all these allegations and in turn has blamed India for cross border terrorism. The blame game between the neighbouring nations of India and Pakistan has continued for decades and disturbed the normal way of life in the state of Jammu and Kashmir including Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). Had there been no partition of India in 1947, the economic situation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir would have entirely remained. The breath taking beauty of Kashmir valley, the other areas of Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) is no less than paradise on earth which has lost its shine due to continuous conflict between India and Pakistan. References Behera, Navneeta Chaddha, Demystifying Kashmir, Brookings Institution, Washington DC, Dewan, Pervez, A History of Kashmir, Manas, George, Algernon & Arnold Durand, The Making of a Frontier: Five Years Experiences and Adventures in Gilgit, Hunza, Nagar, Chitral Paperback Gupta, Sisir, Kashmir: A Study in Indo Pak Relations, Bombay, Asia Publisher, Gupta, Virendra & Alok Bansal, Pakistan occupied Kashmir: The Untold Story Manas New Delhi Knight, Edward Frederick, Where Three Empires Meet: A Narrative of Recent Travel in Kashmir, Western Tibet, Gilgit Paperback Knight, Edward, Frederick & Shafto Adair, The Big Game of Baltistan and Ladakh: A Summer in High Asia, Being a Record of Sport and Travel Paperback Muhammad, Ghulam, Festivals and Folklore of Gilgit Paperback Shekhawat Seema & Debidatta Aurobinda Mahapatra, Kashmir Across LoC, Gyan Publication, Singh, Jasjit, Pakistan occupied Kashmir: Under the Jackboot, Cosmo Publications, New Delhi, Yusuf, Moeed, Exploring the Potential for Economic Development and Cross LoC Collaboration in Jammu Kashmir, Pugwash, Issue Brief, Volume 5, Number 1, July data_files/india/rural_urban_2011.pdf data_files/india/rural_urban_2011.pdf h t t p : / / e a n d s. d a c n e t. n i c. i n / P D F / State_of_Indian_Agriculture, pdf h t tp : / /labour b u r e a unew. g o v. i n/u s e r Co n t e n t / EUS_5th_1.pdf / Clarifications+on+LoC nation/adb-declines-to-fund-pakistans-big-dam-project- in-pok/articleshow/ cms Contrasting Development: A Study of Economic Realities of India and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) 121

122 The China led One Belt One Road in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: Implications for India Manisha Chaurasiya The strategic scenario for India in the region is altering like never before with the One Belt One Road (OBOR) project running through Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) in form of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Without India even geographically moving an inch in the Kashmir region, the circumstances of geo-politics around it have seriously modified in the negative. These developments for a number of reasons are alarming as they are against the Indian strategic and core interests. The recently carved out One Belt One Road, also known as Belt and Road initiative by the People s Republic of China (PRC) has received much expected hype globally. On paper the plan spans across three continents of Asia, Africa and Europe, enveloping approximately some 65 countries. From an Indian position there lies a serious inherent challenge inside the OBOR as its CPEC leg passes through Pakistan occupied territories. This has happened without any prior consultation, permission and negotiation involving India. India restrained from joining the initiative s forum meet last month. Although, the proximity between China and Pakistan in Indian neighbourhood is nothing new yet the presence of the initiative, its growing scope and pace in PoK is alarming to India and indeed contrary to the Indian interests. The paper explores the implications of (a) China-Pakistan axis in PoK and (b) the CPEC leg of the OBOR, on various national security and national interest factors of India. Introduction The conflict in Kashmir has been on-going since last 70 years. These years witnessed several changes in the de jure demarcations between India, Pakistan and China in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. There have been alterations leading to various kinds of de facto boundary of Pakistan and China with India. In all these years the geo-politics has altered in the negative for India as the place of the Radcliffe and 122 World Focus July 2017 McMahon line in various sectors has been taken by Line of Control (LoC) and Line of Actual Control (LAC) respectively by Pakistan and China. The overall Kashmir region on ground possession of India has been reduced drastically. India has remained a recipient of unsubstantiated claims on its territories in Kashmir, illegal occupation of some strategic border areas, use of sub-conventional tactics like infiltration and cross border terrorism against it and conventional clashes, uninvited wars and cease fire violations on the LoC as part of the opportunist moves by Pakistan. China on the other side has proved itself instrumental in these years by illegal transfers of nuclear arsenal, both technology and delivery mechanism to Pakistan to further its quest for nuclear bomb. Adding to that China has been also involved in an infamous barter of strategic territories in Kashmir which has made security situation at the Siachen Glacier even worse for India. In such a pessimistic historical backdrop the recently introduced OBOR initiative of China proves the Indian worst fears true. The CPEC leg of the OBOR has once again not just brought Pakistan and China in close proximity in Kashmir but also is a case of sheer violation of the Indian territorial sovereignty in PoK. The implications of the OBOR s CPEC leg in PoK would be long lasting and negative for India due to a number of reasons. Firstly, the possible uses of CPEC remains yet unknown and after the lesson from the Chinese in Djibouti there are high chances that China would use Pakistan and PoK for military uses. Secondly, this would led to not decrease but an increase in terrorism and anti-india operations by non-states, thirdly, the Pakistani Defence forces and establishment would get a renewed vigour with the support of China to attempt to counter India conventionally. Fourthly, the result of a third party in PoK would be overall negative for the security situation of South Asia. Like other small countries in the region, Pakistan too is getting inside the debt trap of China. These are enormous amounts of infrastructural loans taken from China which are beyond easy and early repayment.

123 The Indian situation at Kashmir, given the increased complexities of Pakistan occupied Kashmir time and again proves one of the ancient realist theories of Kautilya true and applicable. Both China and Pakistan coming together presently through the infrastructure building and connectivity enhancement project OBOR can be equated to two Ari (enemy) of Vijigishu (king/oneself) coming closer. This was warned by Kautilya, as leading to negative strategic consequences for the mighty king in the near future. The China-Pakistan axis in the PoK has become stronger over time and is rapidly materializing infrastructure and strategic capabilities that could undermine India in the long run. The paper explores the implications both long and short term of such a development. At such a juncture India faces a challenging task to counter these pressures and also devise a strategy which is not simply defensive in nature but goes beyond it in the realm of strengthening oneself and prevent such alarming developments. Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: What is at Stake? Kashmir is a part of India. This dates back to not just the British partition of the Indian subcontinent but the Vedic times. The civilizational attributes and designated boundaries were largely discounted when the very year of the creation of Pakistan it invaded Kashmir. The British delineation of India and Pakistan did not marked Kashmir in Pakistan. As a princely state, thus free to decide its future, it decided to enter into instrument of accession with the Union of India on 26 October, Four days before the accession, Pakistan tried its luck and invaded the province of Kashmir. The tribal lashkars who were at fore front were supported actively by the Pakistani government and capabilities and arsenal of the army. Geographically the Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) consists of the so called Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan (referred to as the Northern Areas till August 2009). PoK is part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), and hence an integral part of India 1. These areas have been under the illegitimate control of Pakistan since. At that time India did succeeded in repulsing the invaders from the valley with great valour of the Indian defence forces but the matter was referred to the United Nations (UN) by India. India was hopeful of a fair and legitimate solution to put an end to external aggression and armed confrontation between the two states out of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) 2. However, due to a number of political and technical factors the UNSC was not able to provide justice in this matter and the case remains hanging in mid-air since resulting into a Pakistan s illegal occupation on major parts of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Indian sovereignty is at stake when CPEC passes through its territories in Kashmir without any consultation and permission taken by China and Pakistan from India. These are the same territories which were captured by Pakistan and due to a UN mandated cease fire 70 years ago has been retained by its army. The de jure international border has given way to a de facto Line of Control in Kashmir. In close coordination with China, Pakistan has illegally claimed these territories as purely under its sovereign jurisdiction and started with infrastructure projects in it. Apart from the illegality aspect of the CPEC there are heavy strategic and military interests of both Pakistan and China against India, veiled with the economic and infrastructure development. Pakistan Self-defeating its Position Internationally on Kashmir The position of Pakistan on the Kashmir issue has been internationally weakened by its nod to the CPEC. On one side it has stick to 70 years old demands in the Kashmir land dispute. It has largely claimed territories and claimed historical injustice. But on the other side, motivated by economic gains its enthusiastic deals with China in the disputed land suggests its eagerness to decide the matter unilaterally instead of bilaterally or multilaterally in Kashmir. It has long stick to a position where it has been for multilateral answer to the bilateral dispute of Kashmir. It also reinforces the belief that nothing for Pakistan now remains contested in Kashmir as it has claimed the right to rent, bartered or sell the occupied territories to a third party as it was under its sovereign jurisdiction. Calling the Pakistani Bluff on Independent Kashmir or Azad Kashmir China on the other side has formally acknowledged the Pakistan led story in Kashmir. They have recognized PoK, which Pakistan has had terms as Azad Kashmir as an integral part of sovereignty of Pakistan. The future remains uncertain as not many The China led One Belt One Road in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: Implications for India 123

124 countries in the world and multilateral forums are ready to alter their position on Kashmir. This particular informal merger of PoK with Pakistan in most maps and demarcations also prove Pakistani position hypocritical as it has had claimed that it recognizes the sovereignty of the PoK as a separate entity or as independent Kashmir. On the contrary of recognizing the decision making on the future of these territories has largely been taken by the government sitting in Islamabad with no consultation from the locals and sometimes tribal populations therein. A mockery of the term Azad Kashmir has been made in the hands of Pakistan when it compromised the sovereignty of this entity to a third actor, China. From the beginning the administration of Azad Jammu and Kashmir was nominally under an elected government while the real power rested with the government of Pakistan 3. The OBOR, CPEC and Kashmir The One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative on paper passes through around 65 countries, although the future holds some necessary alterations in the Chinese drawn belts and roads over three continents on the basis of the sovereign governments, territories and their decision making. India has not been a part of the OBOR forum meet due to its infringement on the Indian sovereignty in Kashmir. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is a major sub section of the mega project which connects China s Kashgar with Pakistan s Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea. The CPEC is a combination of highway network, railway network and fibre optic project enveloping the whole country plus the territories of India in the North Kashmir. From a legal as well as strategic perspective, the CPEC leg of the OBOR is especially problematic for the Indian interests as well as for Pakistani sovereignty in future. China Pakistan Economic Corridor is thus emerging as a controversial development. The project is a Pakistan-China bilateral which passes through areas of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) which belongs to India. Territorial sovereignty is a sensitive issue altogether for any state. China has been seen defending its territorial sovereignty and strategic interest in South China Sea and elsewhere. The Indian stakes in Kashmir are historical and real. The Belt and Road Initiative has come in contrast with the core strategic objectives of India 4. One of a pressing challenge India has faced in the recent is the attempts of Pakistan to get greater involved in the PoK and to portray it as a part of Pakistan undoubtedly one of the most pressing challenge the country is facing in the contemporary times. The CPEC emerges as hallmark of this attempt which passes through the heart of the Indian interests in Kashmir. The Chinese strategic interests are in guise of an economic initiative. Future Implications of OBOR in PoK for India 1.Military Uses of PoK Ambiguity has long remained a key word that encompasses the Chinese strategic moves. Regarding the Belt and Road or the OBOR initiative too China has been least vocal in sharing with the world the future course of action and also the details of the proposed project. Apart from the controversies on legality of the CPEC there is a great deal of scepticism on the probable uses of the corridor by China. This uncertainty is largely shared equally among all partner countries of the China led OBOR. In the deal involving PoK too there remains a large veil on its ambitions and the future course of action and utilization of the corridor. C. Raja Mohan believes that the unanswered question- whether these projects are purely civilian, or have strategic and security implications, further complicates the situation 5. The political memory and repercussions of the infamous barter of strategic territories or the 1963 agreement in the Kashmir region between Pakistan and China are still fresh. India remains equally clueless regarding the possible uses of the CPEC as it was from the Karakoram highway. China s display of a high degree of unilateralism and disinterest in negotiating any such project in the PoK with India worsens the situation for India. According to Jayadeva Ranade, the CPEC is that part of OBOR which combines financial assistance with diplomatic support reinforced by military muscle 6. In a recent report the United States Department of Defense, Pentagon stated that China is likely to establish additional military bases in Pakistan and other countries with which it has longstanding friendly ties and similar strategic interests 7. On the above definition, no other country fits as Pakistan does for China, where both share similar strategic interests viz a viz India in South Asia. Srikanth Kondapalli adds that in order to secure the Chinese infrastructure projects it has actively 124 World Focus July 2017

125 deployed its security personnel into Pakistan and also the Pakistan occupied territories of Kashmir 8. Siegfried O. Wolf argues that, China has identified strategic and economic benefits of cooperation with Pakistan but they are at a risk perceptions. Since the start of the CPEC planning and related first engagements in infrastructure and energy sectors, Pakistan witnesses severe debates, critics and protests with crucial impacts on domestic political dynamics 9, these were a result of the widely expected healthy chances of direct China influence in the daily chores of Pakistan and its future sovereignty. The military uses of the Gwadar Port have also been under the scanner as developed with the Chinese money. The trade and commercial uses of this strategically located port on the Arabian Sea are less likely than it being utilized as a military base by China in the near future. What leads credence to the doubts about China s military build-up in the region is the construction of a Chinese military base in Djibouti. China claims that this facility is designed to help the navy and army further participate in UN peacekeeping operations, carry out escort missions in the waters near Somalia and the Gulf of Aden, and provide humanitarian assistance 10. China distinguishes between a military base and a military supply base. It calls Djibouti a latter but the overall strategic scenario hints towards the military uses of Pakistan by China soon. A report titled, Kashmir: Present Situation and Future Prospects by Baroness Emma Nicholson in 2007 hinted towards early Chinese presence in PoK. The report was adopted by the European Union acquaints to some realities of the state and society in the PoK which has largely remain untouched by the outside world for past almost 70 years. According to the report, in PoK the local administration is dysfunctional and the Pakistani state and military have total control over the region...the so called AJK is not a sovereign entity and its prime minister and president have to owe allegiance to the federal government of Pakistan to survive in office 11, the report also highlights that the Trans Karakoram Tract, formerly a part of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was under the Chinese control 12. Almost a decade of Chinese direct and indirect involvement in Pakistan has led to it coming forward with a economic corridor from the region. 2.Increase in Terrorism and Anti-India Operations by Non-States Apart from the enhanced Chinese presence, PoK has long been a hub of Islamic radicalization and anti- India elements. The region has increasingly been under the influence of the jihadi ideology 13 The ISIS, Afghan Taliban and a number of registered international terror networks have found safe haven in Pakistan. China has been an active and vocal advocate of countering international terrorism. Through several multilateral forums like the United Nations (UN) and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) it has raised the issue globally but the presence of the Chinese in no way is expected to discourage these terror elements in the PoK. To be precise China while concentrating on its economic and strategic objectives has never paid attention to or criticised the terror funding and the international terror networks in which its new partner state Pakistan is neck deep and has faced international condemnation a number of times. After China s well rooted presence in Pakistan occupied Kashmir these groups would be strengthened instead of weakened due to China s deliberate overlook and strategy of avoidance at their activities contributing to not just anti-india terrorist activities but also them furthering international terrorism. 3. Renewed Vigour of Pakistani Defence Forces against India This would not be the first time that the Pakistani defence forces would get comfort and support from their Chinese counterparts. But certainly, the active presence of the Chinese alongside them in PoK in guise of economic mega project s security would work in the negative for India. In the time to come the Pakistan would gain more confidence on its capabilities, thus more likely to commit adventurism and cease fire violations on the LoC and border against India. Pakistan has described its friendship with China as, higher than the mountains, deeper than the oceans, sweeter than honey 14. According to Siegfried O Woolf, the CPEC based, new and far-reaching social, economic trajectories and determinants for decision making in Pakistan will not bring out a fundamental change in the reactionary die-hard, security-dominated mindset of the country s The China led One Belt One Road in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: Implications for India 125

126 leadership featured by repressive domestic politics and state-sponsorship of cross-border terrorism 15. He adds that on the contrary the CPEC project in the long-run will have serious consequences for domestic security, stability, and national harmony, as well as constructive relations and cooperation with Pakistan s neighbors 16. Instead of getting greater involved in underdeveloped country s growth the Pakistani defence forces are communicating signals of their renewed interest in countering India. The instances of ceasefire violations have dramatically increased in the recent months. May, 2017 witnessed heavy shelling along the LoC in Jammu and Kashmir. The Pakistani Army violated ceasefire in Balakote sector and Nowshera sector targeting forward posts and civilian areas along the LoC Deteriorating Overall Security Situation of South Asia China is gaining a strong foothold in Pakistan and PoK through pouring in heavy economic assistance. This leads to Pakistan entering into a debt trap from which it is hard for it to come out in the near future. Repaying these loans would be nearly impossible for Pakistan leading to a debt crisis. The debt crisis could lead to China suggesting a formula to Pakistan which it did to Sri Lanka recently. In a similar unequal relationship between China and Sri Lanka, when the former faced incapability in repayment of loans, the latter floated the idea of selling away of Sri Lankan territory to it in order to wave off its loan. Similar to the situation of Sri Lanka, a small island country that has borrowed billions of dollars from China which in the present has attempted impinging on its sovereignty, is the future of Pakistan. The overall security situation of South Asia is under threat and the future looks bleak. The history of the Cold War suggests that Pakistan is indeed located at a strategic geo-political space. Sale and purchase of its territories to any new actor welcomes uncertainties not just for India but for other South Asian countries around it like, Afghanistan. The stability in the West Asian region has remained contested since the previous century. Afghanistan has witnessed the Soviet invasion, the great power politics of the United States and Soviet Union, the emergence of worst forms of non states and authoritarianism from the Taliban etc. At such a juncture for the security and stability of the region it is prerequisite that the states do not fall into another 126 World Focus July 2017 trap. Historically, debt crisis or the debt trap being one that brings and harbours worst forms of dependencies between the borrower and the lender. These are some of the implications of the OBOR and its CPEC leg on India. Many geo-strategic realities around India are altering at a rapid pace. The Chinese rise is evident and its intensions are largely under wraps. However, the Chinese official position shared by most and Chinese academicians stress on the OBOR having solely economic objectives. However, the implementation of OBOR especially in disputed and highly disturbed territories like the PoK would not be without repercussions. Conclusion The mega infrastructure and development project in Pakistan occupied Kashmir without keeping India in negotiations and decision making is illegal. Adding to that the high level of dependency and freebees for it coming from China, a third party apart from the disputants India and Pakistan hints towards vested interest of this party. The geographical location of Pakistan has remained geostrategic for the US during the Cold War and the PRC for its OBOR ambitions. At such a juncture the OBOR in PoK is one of the greatest challenges India and the South Asian region is facing in the contemporary times. The implications of it, as discussed above are all negative from a strategic perspective for India. Endnotes 1 Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, IDSA (2011), Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: The Changing Discourse, IDSA PoK Project Report, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: files/book/book_pakistanoccupiedkashmir.pdf 2 Ibid 3 Ibid 4 Mohan, C. Raja (2017), How do China and India Manage Ties for the Good of South Asian Security?, 2 April, 2017, accessed on 27 May, 2017, available at: 5 Ibid 6 Ranade, Jayadeva (2017), China anxious for India to endorse the OBOR initiative, the Hindustan Times, 14 May, Accessed on 27 May, 2017, available at: anxious-for-india-to-endorse-the-obor-initiative/story- Z3llATMtkugukl48mcUbdI.html

127 7 Zee News, After CPEC, China likely to build military base in Pakistan: Pentagon, accessed on 9 June,2017, available at: 8 Kondapalli, Srikanth (2017), Why India is Not Part of the Belt and Road Initiative summit, accessed on 16 th May, 2017, available at: article/opinion/why-india-is-not-part-of-the-belt-androad-initiative-summit / 9 Woolf, Siegfried O. (2017), OPINION- An Unequal Equation? CPEC Development and Pakistan s Political Mindset, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: / s s o a r- i n d r a s t r a g l o b a l w o l f - An_unequal_equation_CPEC_development.pdf? sequence=1 10 Zee News, IDSA, Ibid. 13 Ibid 14 Subramanian, Nirupama (2017), A Short History of the Relationship: China-Pakistan, Bhai-Bhai, accessed on 27 May, 2017, available at: article/explained/a-short-history-of-the-relationship- china-pakistan-bhai-bhai-belt-and-road-initiative / 15 Woolf, Ibid 17 Times of India (2017), Pakistan Violates Ceasefire in J&K s Balakote Sector, accessed on 27 May, 2017, available at: pakistan-violates-ceasefire-in-jks-balakote-sector/ articleshow/ cms PoK will soon be part of India: Yogi Adityanath By: PTI Ballia (up) Published:August 19, :04 pm The BJP lawmaker from Gorakhpur, who was in Ballia to attend a function in Rasra area, said Thursday night that India should take a stand on the issue of Balochistan. Lashing out at Pakistan, BJP MP Yogi Adityanath has said if the neighbouring country dares to fight with India, its existence would be in danger and that Pak-occupied Kashmir (PoK) would soon be a part of India. The BJP lawmaker from Gorakhpur, who was in Ballia to attend a function in Rasra area, said Thursday night that India should take a stand on the issue of Balochistan. On senior Congress leader Digvijaya Singh s comments referring to Kashmir as India-occupied Kashmir, Yogi said Singh s reaction reflected the values of his party. Holding the Congress responsible for Kashmir problem, he said if Sardar Patel would have got the responsibility in place of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, the issue would have not arisen. He said time has come for freedom of PoK and it would be part of India soon. On Mumbai attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed s appeal to Pakistan Army Chief Gen Raheel Sharif, to send troops to Kashmir to obey the pending order of M A Jinnah, Yogi said the neighbouring country has suffered four crushing defeats. Addressing a rally held under the banner of Defence Council of Pakistan in Karachi on Sunday, Saeed had claimed, Kashmiris had announced before the partition that they wanted to remain with Pakistan. But after the partition, India forcibly sent Army to Jammu and Kashmir. On this, Quaid-e- Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah ordered his commander-in-chief to respond by sending troops but he refused (to obey his orders). Now, I ask Gen Raheel Sharif to send troops in Jammu and Kashmir as Quaid-e-Azam s order is pending, Saeed had said. (Courtesy: The China led One Belt One Road in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: Implications for India 127

128 Introduction The state of Jammu and Kashmir was the largest of the 562 princely states of India, covering over 85,806 miles or 222,236 square kilometers. Situated in the northernmost and north-western region of India and passing through the Karakoram and the associated ranges of mountains, it reaches Tibet in the east and Sinkiang in the north, both provinces of China. In the north-west, it is bound by the snow-capped mountains in Gilgit and Hunza, coterminous with Afghanistan on the western side and almost touching the then USSR territory known as Soviet Tajikstan through the Pamirs. In 1941, there were three provinces in the state of Jammu and Kashmir; The Jammu province comprised the districts of Jammu, Kathua, Udhampur, Mirpur, and Reasi along with the Jagirs of Chenani and Poonch. The Kashmir province consisted of the districts of Baramula, Anantnag, and Muzaffarabad. The frontier districts consisted of Ladakh, Baltistan, and the Gilgit Agency. Following the partition of India and Pakistan, and the latter s attempt to capture the valley, Kashmir was split into Jammu and Kashmir, a Pakistan-administered Kashmir and, later, a Chinese territory, which is mostly uninhabited. Ever since, India and Pakistan have used the territory to exercise bitter foreign policy towards each other, culminating in three wars. While self-determination has always been a project in Jammu and Kashmir, it took a rigged election in 1987 to prompt a call to arms against the Indian government s rule of the region; young men ventured into Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) for training in guerrilla warfare. Thousands of Kashmiri men travelled secretively to PoK for arms training, with a set goal to ûght the Indian state. However, many of those who travelled to PoK soon became disillusioned and looked at the possibilities of return. In 2010, the Government of Jammu and Kashmir announced a rehabilitation policy for them. When the policy came into effect, many ex-militants (along with their PoK wives and children) started returning home, but not through the ofûcial channel, as the government would have expected. The ex-militants generally avoid the 128 World Focus July 2017 Rehabilitation Policy: A Field Study of PoK Returnee Militants Arif Hussain Malik & Toseef Ahmad Bhat designated points mainly to evade possible arrest by the Indian security forces and the cumbersome documentation process. Therefore, the Government of J&K does not recognize them as beneûciaries of the rehabilitation policy. So far, two rehabilitation policies for ex-militants have been announced by the J&K government. While the ûrst rehabilitation policy (2004) is meant for the ex-militants residing in J&K, the second one (2010) focuses on the ex-militants from Kashmir living in PoK and Pakistan who desire to return to the Valley. This article will focus on the 2010 policy, which is meant for those who had crossed the LOC for arms training between January 1989 and December 2009, but had shunned violence later. Further, this article argues that the 2010 rehabilitation policy has failed to attract ex-militants, and those who returned through other points were not entitled to the benefits of the rehabilitation policy. A field study was conducted by the researchers in order to understand and get in the various issues and concerns of those who had returned under the banner of this policy. Understanding Rehabilitation The conflicts worldwide are different and ambiguous because they are based on multifarious layers. There are conflicts between states and eventually conflicts do exist between state and its subjects (people). Here we refer to a conflict which is both between two states and a state and its people. Conflicts constitute players who either support the declared structure or resist it, with rebellious apprehensions, using arms and ideas. Conflicts don t stop to exist but pertinently undergo a change in intensity and velocity. Conflicts all over the world were resisted using different methods based on physical operations ranging from direct assault to proxy warfare resulting in death of anti-state elements and setback to ideology which tickets them to fight. However, killings and an attempt to uproot the party of conflict or militants never helped the state to prevent and eradicate conflicts. For instance, Sri Lankan offensive against LTTE in 2009 has helped in disorganization and dismantle of this

129 group, but it has not proved effective to pull out the feelings of alienation among minorities in general and Tamils in particular. Same is the fate of state actions all over the world. Given the complex nature of conflicts, new techniques were experimented to address them in tune with the contemporary scenario. Rehabilitation is the most celebrated practice in modern vocabulary of conflicts based on reconciliation, accommodation and post conflict reconstruction. Rehabilitation is akin to words like reintegration, resettlement and re-entry which share a common prefix implying return to a previous condition. 1 Literally rehabilitation means to reinstate a human being which he/she had left behind after resorting to an act which he/she chooses alternatively. 2 Those who choose an act contrary to normal structure of society and system are termed as rebels, deviants, reactionaries and beyond these come terrorists and militants. Globally, rehabilitation and community engagement is a new devised technique in the fight against extremism and its violent manifestations- terrorism and insurgency. 3 Earlier counter-insurgency and anti-militancy measures were revolving round shoot, kill and proxy dictums. By killing militants and persecution of families, minds get over radicalized and indoctrination continues unabatedly. Humans have a deep feeling of being relative such as being some ones son; daughter, mother and father so on and so forth. Indeed rehabilitation has a great connectivity with deradicalization and behavioral alteration to meet the set requirements of the niche he/she has left in persuasion of wrong path. Without fulfilling the qualifications for rehabilitation such as change in offender s heart, mind and precariously entire behavior threatening the state establishment, the word rehabilitation doesn t apply. Government of a state after calling offenders for rehabilitation has to fill the requirements of the move. An important support which the government has to guarantee is that whereby an individual is allowed to enjoy the same status as others are by shedding away the negative label of offender. Rehabilitation and Militancy The war torn state of Jammu and Kashmir has witnessed a massive migration of young breed on the eve of 1990s to other part of State, internationally known as Pakistan Administered Kashmir or Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. The intension behind the move was not to settle there but to get trained in the training camps for initiating a war against Indian forces deployed in Jammu and Kashmir. The training camps were embodiment of ideological and material ammunition run by Pakistan to start a guerilla Jung 4. Massive human flow from this part of Kashmir was an indicator of stern alienation of people from the Indian union and Pakistan was calculating it their way. 5 The people associated with the militancy were bereft of strategy and cooperation. Due to rift, they couldn t continue the fight under a single banner. The rift was moving towards a different end and made fighters to think on different lines. There emerged concept of iconography and the icons were Pakistan, Independence and universal Islamic Shariya to work accordingly. After smelling the ambiguity in movement, some of the young fighters began to feel disillusioned and a piecemeal pause in militancy was seen after State structures were very much involved in examining the situation. The situation was disturbed by militancy, internal and external stakeholders. Every day was marked by an occurrence with a militant and violent outcome. Indian forces bereft of proper mechanism made experiments blend of warfare and proxy game. The state practices taken as measures engraved the resentment, ironically augmented the debacle. After observing the worst results, and in order to curb militancy in a new way government moved forward. For the first time a policy called Surrender Policy for militants in 1995 by Govrnor V.K.Krishna Rao was started, which promised them 1.5 lakh fixed deposits and a monthly 2000 rupees stipend and separate reward to the arms handed over to army or security agencies. 7 Numerous militants surrendered under this policy devised for rehabilitation and were recruited as special police officers (SPO s), or in Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and Border Security Force (BSF), and mostly were given opportunities to take recourse to selfemployment. 8 This policy consistently attracted the chunk of fighters to get benefitted but could not mobilize their plight vertically. The administrative illness and indirect beneficiary of conflict called as top and down bureaucracy made mess of the policies Rehabilitation Policy:A Field Study of PoK Returnee Militants 129

130 meant for the militants. Besides not standing by the promises encrypted in the documents, security agencies made the situation for them more difficult by calling them to camps, garrisons, and police stations. This act of regular visits to army cantonments paved way to dilute the social image already dotted with colors of unacceptability on the side of society. The promises made by government proved as just hoax. 9 The internationally recognized acronym called 9/11 pushed change in the policies of states encompassing through militancy, civil wars and specifically the countries which equip the combatants inside the blood games. Progressively, pressure was mounting on Pakistan for halting the support to militants and fighters in the battle of Kashmir against Indian state. Pakistan had undergone a noticeable change in its approach towards neighboring countries especially India and castigated extremism as something contrary to its image at international level. General Musharraf extended his words and declared that no organization will be allowed to indulge in terrorism in the name of Kashmir. 10 He had assumed that only peaceful measures will work in addressing the Kashmir problem and the steps were heading towards good end and way forward was tantamount. 11 Kashmir had its election in 2002 which symbolically challenged the decade s long voice of National Conference. New name with a different caliber was at top to deliver and having vigils eye on across border equations. After gauging the mind at work in Pakistan the state government came up with an initiative though along the lines of its predecessor Surrender Policy format known as Rehabilitation Policy of It was for militants residing in Jammu and Kashmir. The government of Jammu and Kashmir admitted that 432 militants were benefitted under this policy and an amount of 9.59 crores was spent on surrendered militants. It includes 6.48 crore as fixed deposit and 3.11 crore based on 2000 per month to every militant. 13 While examining the status of the policy there comes out a filtration mode in its execution. The militants who had surrendered under this policy were classified as, 1) top militants having access to administration, occupying the say in system and state apparatus, 2) the next class comprises of militants who had surrendered but are poor in getting the stipends and other measures taken by the government to mainstream them. Rehabilitation of these third class militants 14 got failed because of institutional and administrative negligence. 15. The policy has failed to meet all the challenges and goals it was devised in connection with. Rehabilitation Policy 2010 The footprints set by the previous government (PDP- Congress) for options beyond violent state craft. The promotion of reconciliation, dialogue and governance was seen with a lot of scope to move forward. While examining the inclination of people towards the change in mode of thinking the NC government headed by Omar Abdullah began to bargain on the lines transgressing his father s legacy. New Delhi thought to move beyond from buying reconciliation through financial and other means to human understanding. The internet and open access to media disseminated information about the growing and peace generating environment between the two countries. Militants living in PoK and other parts of Pakistan turned lunatic while observing the restoration of good life in Jammu and Kashmir. The human flow across border since the road connectivity between segregated parts of Kashmir generated once again love of land amongst the breed which was living across LOC in PoK. 16 With every passing day militants were communicating their families and relatives to configure grounds for their return. Pakistan government though caught in its own maladies didn t hesitate in managing the return of willing Kashmiri settlers there. The willingness of both nations towards a constructive reconciliation and state governments desperate urge is worth acknowledging. The government entered into a dialogue with center focusing on Return and Rehabilitation of militants of Jammu and Kashmir. Militants were returning from PoK before the policy as well. 17 But an agreed pact was concluded between the governments in The move drew meticulous enthusiasm not only here among the families who did live without their wards for decades but also among the departed and weary men in exile. The policy which national and international media has pronounced as a guide to reconciliation was much weighty than any other human endeavor and new language to address the complicated nature of conflict. Jammu and Kashmir government came up with such a step and designed out a policy in November The document of the policy, titled, Policy and 130 World Focus July 2017

131 Procedure for Return of Ex-Militants to Jammu and Kashmir State, generally referred to as the amnesty policy, outlines an elaborate process that includes, identiûcation, monitoring, debrieûng, rehabilitation and reintegration of former militants and their dependents. The policy reads that all those who have gone to Pakistan for training to be part of insurgent groups, are eligible to return back to state which they actually belong to. Additionally, the returnees have to guarantee the change of heart and segregation from militant outfits. The returnees are subject to law and if criminal charges of heinous involvement are to be found and in connection to that law has to go beyond mere interpretation. Security agencies were authorized to address the cases and issues covering the returnees. One of the Paramount features of the policy was the Routes mentioned for the return of youth. Such routes are: Attari-Wagah, Chakan Da- Bagh, Kaman Post, and Indira Gandhi International Airport. 19 These routes were meant for returnees to take advantage of. Suspicion and misunderstanding being the guiding principle between the two nations made the policy to enlist a formality which has brought it under a pessimistic circle. Submission of application forms in Jammu and Kashmir and across LOC was included and the strict scrutiny paved way for its poor response from the ex-militants living in PoK/ Pakistan. The Indian embassy in Pakistan and security forces on selected check posts of designed routes were authorized to manage the human flow. The Policy and Rehabilitees The concept of theorizing peace on the basis of suspicion, proxy and manipulation has been guiding principle between the nations for decades. However, India and Pakistan are still to come out of it. Taking initiatives and measures is a daily business in political circles of both the nations. The anticipation and configuration required for measures to address crisis is missing as for as Indo-Pak relations are concerned 20. They jump to policies and measures without looking at ground reality. People are guaranteed rights by international charters and constitution of nations to live in an unambiguous way. A culture of accommodation, reconciliation and theories of acculturation are prevalent in the contemporary territorial structures, an offshoot of nation-state concept. Here, it refers to the modals which these two nations in particular do not employ in order to arrive at certain amicable solution. Rehabilitation policy deduced by Indian government in association with Jammu and Kashmir was something which returnees (ex-militants) misquote and mispronounce as Aman Ki Asha 21. Any movement which is not inclusive and localized obviously becomes weak and ultimately falls short of achieving the set goals. Due to internal confusion thousands of militants didn t return to Jammu and Kashmir after getting trained and stayed there for survival. 22 This policy rejuvenated the feeling of belongingness amongst the departed and politically convicted ones. Means of communication are varied and taking advantage of these means militants began to think in proportion to the lines mentioned in the policy. 23 Change of heart and mind is prerequisite to return which they have undergone decades ago after saying goodbye to violence. The language to convince them at the initial stage of the policy was something which caught wild fire. There was an emancipating response from the militants and families they belong to. The announcements on newspapers, TV channels and internet news portals were reading that a place of birth is calling its children back with many opportunities apart from shelter and natural settings. 24 The rational conditions do die the moment question of betrayal and love comes in. Without caring about repercussions the wronged ones and victims of ever proxy did apply and signaled the initiative the way they did during their migration to PoK for training. 25 The culture of profit in terms of political, economic and social look even at the cost of survival of others is an ever practiced practice. Without including the estimates on original papers the verbal promises of accommodation, reintegration and wellbeing were made. 26 Pakistan already fraught with national infection didn t hesitate them to visit back and issued all the documents and papers for return. The policy being new in terminology couldn t hesitate in continuing the manipulative nature of state and its administrators. The legacy of initiating programs and policies on the name of peace continues. Instead of clubbing the gap, policy out lays talk of enlargement. The routes mentioned in the policy were devised to make the return of these militants less economic, friendly and easily accessible. The greatest casualty which this policy is encompassing through is Rehabilitation Policy:A Field Study of PoK Returnee Militants 131

132 the non-seriousness of the officials deployed on Jammu and Kashmir and across LOC to meet the security challenges. Returnees on papers were directed to visit the concerned embassy. The officials there would behave in a way which shows their unwillingness to continue the policy 27. The negligence and ill seriousness of deployed people, made these returnees to opt for third option. Without examining the impact of an illegal option the militants would believe that this is directed by Indian government. 28 Border trade if not a success in South Asia, but, those who believe in sellout leave no stone unturned to make Nepal another option for these people to come. The hobnobbing culture of loot, a blend of security and civil apparatus is what state authorizes them. To extend message of wrong approach of returnees to authorities led these men taking salary at the name of security to publicly defame this policy. 29 The routes designated to make the return of ex-militants possible didn t fit the mindgame of officials which they believe in for last decades and being beneficiaries of it. 30 Majority of the (exmilitants, their Pakistani wives and children) are disillusioned with the rehabilitation policy, since there are only few designated points of return, among which Nepal is not recognized. Therefore, the Government of J&K does not recognize them as beneûciaries of the rehabilitation policy. According to the J&K government, by the end of April 2015 not even a single Kashmiri militant had returned under the rehabilitation policy. The state government notes that up to April 2015, 453 former militants, along with 197 wives and 603 children had returned, but illegally, via Nepal and other routes, along with their families. 31 Therefore, these ex-militants and their families are denied the beneûts of the rehabilitation policy. Following are some of the issues and concerns related to reintegration and rehabilitation policy that confronts with these ex-militants. Security Due to recent birth of twin nations (Indian and Pakistan), security is still defined as something based on stereotype paradigms. Indian s look at Pakistan nationals with suspicion and vice-versa. These stranded youth were also part of PoK establishment for decades. In order to meet all the challenges of security to avoid any bad occurrence, security agencies incorporated all the formalities in policy. Aspirants couldn t resist and stood by every scrutiny state wanted them to go through. 32 All returnees and their dependents were imprisoned for some time. Imprisonment of militants and these returnees which according to the police is required needs proper focus. Instead of fostering a sense of security in these returnees, insecurity has an upper hand in their daily business. 33 These returnees grieve that they were imprisoned for more time than needed. A handful of people add that their families including women and children were harassed. Invariable outputs show the unacceptability of state and administration to reintegrate them to their lost environment, such as cases in different courts and police stations beyond the reach of ex-militants. A resident of one district or region has to visit the courts situated in other district or region. These returnees are patched with charges of which they do not have knowledge of. This fraud on part of state provokes these returnees and associated people to think of a wrong path, more originally posing threat to state. 34 Human Relations and Return Rehabilitation if put to table of discussion is something which narrates story of retrieval to a situation, place and partly addition in these things, exception is of time only. For survival being in relation and contact is something which adds flavor to human life. The policy reads arrangements to be made for the dependents of those returnees who have married in PoK/Pakistan for entry into the country as per the existing laws of the land. The wives and children without any accusation of being involved in militant acts and being offshoots of circumstances are calling it a cold cage where a man dies of freeze. 35 They claim themselves as men who have joined mainstream. They are indeed brought in connection to mainstream, is what they want to relate with those who fly from Kashmir and land relentlessly in Pakistan. The statement is recorded as if Mushaal Malik 36 can visit Kashmir and back to Pakistan why not those who were brought under an agreement. 37 The dependents were reluctant to come because of the repercussions but authorities manipulated it beyond reference to the policy. Death of mother and other family members is a universal occurrence and synchronically visiting the funeral rites is also a thing carrying importance. 38 The returned families are now in 132 World Focus July 2017

133 Jammu and Kashmir and despite expedient reasons are not allowed once to see their relatives. Policy document shows the very imprudent nature of men at the helm of affairs which signifies issuance of documents just to enter the territory and without caring about the future plight, ex-militants misinterpreted it. These initiatives are futile unless don t have human ground and overshadowing the maxims of politics. 39 Rehabilitation falls short of meaning when rehabilitee is denied the opportunity even to think about the habitation which habituated him/her alternatively. Here connection is with wards and wives who happened to be the residents of other part of state or Pakistan and denial of documents to visit their birth places legally. 40 Economic Issues Re-integration occupies importance in the policy which was promised through training in trade and other skill oriented courses. Being part of PoK and other parts of Pakistan these people are less aware about the changes undergone in social and economic fabric. Now they need economic means to continue the life and for them to start a job directly is tough. Their survival is subject to many conditions which government and society is yet to recognize. This ever and first humanly step taken by government gets dead when it passes through an unclean way. These returnees do not demand jobs and philanthropist bounties but at the same time to deny them basic avenues to work and live is that state is not looking into. 41 This deprivation reminds them of the reservations and financial assistance which they were receiving from Pakistan government. 42 Poor economic conditions badly hit the much needed education to their children. Acknowledging the fact that all spheres have undergone changes and eventual shift has marked the state managements from mere structures to bodies of deliverance. Despite these changes, the governments at center and state are still weighing the policy as threat. 43 Economic assistance doesn t mean big jobs and employment in government offices to ex-militants but it means economic future of wards who are termed by this policy as dependents. 44 Additionally, differentiating between earning to feed and economic guarantee, the former is energy driven result, which indeed is part of the latter as well, but the economic guarantee is broader concept which is confined till moral, social and collective sense is at top to direct the course of society and system. 45 Economic guarantee is very much subject to identity which the returnees are short of. Global connotations of life and system are making demands of qualification wider of which identity and documents to recognition are essential. 46 Radicalization is subject to feelings against state which comes from its ill practices and finally a spark neglected changes into unending fire. 47 There seems to be no need to teach someone how to be a militant except to equip him with arms. Social Language A social animal is an accumulation of characters besides being physical structure and rehabilitation is a step which demands social structures, characters and language to be accommodative. 48 The returnees received a warm welcome from villages and Mohallas they had born in. The wives of these returnees were given bridal treatment in the initial days and children accordingly got good responds from families they returned to. Initial days were indicating optimum results and these returnees and associated people recorded content. The short period temperament being result of suspicion and less avenues to overcome could not let the environment of compromise to continue. With the passage of time things begin to change. The militants who did live in Jammu and Kashmir in nineties as peace citizens were in obsession that their act of joining militancy would be rewarded with social and economic bounties. 49 Their flimsy act of joining militancy and concept of heroism situated on the postulates of gun and grenade was socially deplorable those days. The disconnected and scattered society resultant of modern technology and global definitions was ready to offer many things apart from their inclination they came in connection with. They began to experience awry things against their preoccupied thinking. 50 The only remnant thing which reminds them of their hey-days is that they are being called by government as ex-militants and in general people call them as capitulators to Indian forces. 51 The general perception about militancy was once you join the wrong path, it becomes evident to die at the hands of Rehabilitation Policy:A Field Study of PoK Returnee Militants 133

134 security forces but the policy changed the narrative. The families which they belong had all formalities done to legally transfer the possessions which they have to surrender after their return now. This widened the gap between the families which gave birth to militants and now families the militants own. The families of returnees living in Jammu and Kashmir are repenting decade s long protection of properties. The property which actually doesn t belong to them made these people to take U-turn. 52 The social unacceptability has made scars very grave for the returnees, which has led to an insane occurrence in Naidkha, Bandipora district of Kashmir province where a woman from Pakistan set herself ablaze and died of burns in protest to social and administrative animosity. 53 Kashmir known for hospitality falls short of essence it had earned in the foreign eyes. The returnees are denied shelter and human treatment and are considered as what they call as Dalits. 54 The social language persecutes the children psychologically dubbing them as children of those who deceived freedom. In social dictionary of Kashmir Gujjars 55 and tribal s are termed as downtrodden people. The PoK is a hilly part of Jammu and Kashmir and in Kashmir they are seen as Gujjars though rich and wealthy. The children who took birth from the wives of these militants originally the residents of PoK are termed as Gujjars. 56 This visits the spine of these children as a social harassment. Policy is made up of non-living things like ink, paper and words and its appropriation to human affair is a sorry state affair. Policy if put to academic and human test is something which falls short of law backing, implementation and enforcement through a legal order. If law denies them guarantee to live and work at the same time is pushing them to cry. Policies are subject to anticipatory configuration, whereby policy seems to be moving ahead with fruition. Without taking repercussions into consideration the policy was initiated to fit the drama out of colonial legacy. It created another class to demonstrate and to disturb the already disturbed daily business. Exodus of Pandits undoubtedly was offshoot of militancy and militancy was itself product of political and economic misunderstandings. In both cases, the word rehabilitation was devised to throw out confusion. Pandits are yet to come in valley and the ex-militants who were living in PoK or Pakistan had come back to accept the national integration and requirements of normalcy. 57 Separate colonies and employment guarantee to Pandits and denial of basic rights to ex-militants and family s needs complete biopsy. Capacity building and training in skill development are measuring rods to assuage the conflict. Politics on human conduct and rights being reminiscent of the British colonial legacy is prevalent to add flavor to the conflict. Data Interpretation The data interpretation is based on the interviews conducted by the researchers during the course of the study. The interview method was used in this study. A total of sixty (60) interviewees could be contacted through. A total of nine questions were asked to all interviewees. Based on their answers, it was found that their views varied in regard to the type of questions asked. Firstly, regarding the know-how of the rehabilitation policy for them (militants who crossed over to PoK), 45 interviewees out of 60 are of the view that they came to know of this policy through print and electronic media only. At the same time, they were not aware of the proper procedure and guidelines through which they could have easily came back to their home state without any problems and danger. 15 interviewees would assert that we were informed by our families living in Jammu and Kashmir and they also had not proper knowledge of the policy. Secondly, on answering the question about the awareness of the routes they could use under the guidelines of this policy, it was found that 57 of the total interviewees came through the routes that were not mentioned in the policy like Nepal. Also, the interviewees were not allowed to take the routes mentioned in the policy like the Wagah and Attari crossing points and instead were directed to the Nepal route. 3 of the 60 interviewees held that they took advantage of legal routes mentioned in the policy. Thirdly, regarding the problems faced by them while coming back to their birthplaces, 40 interviewees are of the opinion that they were investigated by the security forces after crossing the International border between Nepal and India and then sent to jails for required time without any reason and justification. Also, 20 interviewees had a very bad experience throughout the entire process. These respondents and their families were being harassed un-necessarily by 134 World Focus July 2017

135 the security forces and money was demanded from them as well. Fourthly, when asked how much they are satisfied with the initiative taken by the government, a total of 55 interviewees had a negative view of this policy. They are of the belief that they were bluffed in the name of the facilities being provided to the returnee s. They do not consider themselves as full citizens after their return. They do not consider themselves at par with other citizens when it comes to privileges enjoyed by the common masses. Their family members are not allowed to meet their spouses back in Pakistan occupied Kashmir and in various other parts of Pakistan. Five interviewees had a favorable view of this policy. However, these five interviewees belong to the well-off families here and hence do not need governmental assistance/support for their survival. Fifthly, about the treatment and social relations in the Jammu and Kashmir, 45 interviewees believe that their society and family is not treating them well. Further, they also complain of property embezzlement by the family members. Even they could not get a share in the homes they once left. 15 interviewees believe that they are very well accommodated in the society and the family as well. Sixthly, regarding the social exclusion of their children, 50 interviewees are of the opinion that their children face lots of problems in getting admission to various schools in the state. However, 10 interviewees are very much positive regarding this issue. Such interviewees are of the opinion that our brethren support us in all possible ways. For them, there are some private schools which do not differentiate between our children and those of the common people. Seventhly, the question asked to the interviewees was about the comparison of their life in the PoK and that of Jammu and Kashmir. 55 interviewees praise the government of PoK and the people there for their support and cooperation in each and every respect. Their children get the benefit of reservation in admission and jobs in every fields provided by the Government of Pakistan. 5 interviewees however, are satisfied with their current status. In addition to it, 50 interviewees are willing to go back to PoK or Pakistan in connection to the treatment such as reservations in all fields of life and social behavior of people available there. Eighthly, on the question of chances to rejoin militancy themselves or their children, 25 interviewees are of the view that their children if meted with the same treatment by the government continuously, may join militancy sooner or later. There are chances for the returnee s as well to join the ranks of militants if their family members receive such kinds of discriminatory response from the government and the society at the same time. However, 35 interviewees are of the opinion that if they would not recourse to the militancy in the future, still they will continue their fight for their rights as dignified citizen till their breath Lastly, regarding the return of other people still living in PoK or Pakistan, 53 interviewees are of the view that they should not come back at any cost. Government and society in Jammu and Kashmir is not accommodative and reconciliatory. They do not want to rehabilitate any returnee, so they are at good in Pakistan and PoK. 7 of the 60 interviewees believe that people stranded across LOC should come back to unanimously fight the atrocities of government rather to pressure it for fulfillment of their grievances. Conclusions Effective reintegration of ex-militants into society at the economic, political and psycho-social levels is absolutely critical. This would enable them to resume normal and productive lives. However, prior to the rehabilitation and reintegration process, the ûrst step is the recognition as ex-militants of those formerly involved in combat. It is only after the former have been identiûed and recognized as ex-militants, and subsequently, as beneûciaries of the reintegration and rehabilitation policy, can their reintegration process under the policy begin. In the case of Kashmir, the ûrst and the foremost issue is recognition as exmilitants of those Kashmiris who have returned or desire to return to the Valley from across the LoC in PoK and Pakistan, after shunning the path of violence. In 2010, in an appreciable move, while the Government of J&K announced a policy of rehabilitation for the Kashmiri ex-militants who wanted to return from across the LoC in PoK and Rehabilitation Policy:A Field Study of PoK Returnee Militants 135

136 Pakistan, the designation of just ûve Points of Return (Atari, Wagah, Salamabad, Chakan-Da-Bagh, and Indira Gandhi International Airport), has been a major bottleneck in attracting the ex-militants, who mostly take an arduous journey from PoK or Pakistan to Nepal to return to the Valley to avoid harassment by both Pakistani and Indian security forces. Since most ex-militants have not entered the Valley ofûcially, they are not entitled to the beneûts of the rehabilitation policy. The ex-militants are viewed with suspicion by both the state and the society, thereby hampering their effective reintegration and rehabilitation. The exmilitants lamented that while the state and the security forces do not recognise them as ex-militants (to be rehabilitated) or as civilians, the communities mostly view them as traitors who betrayed the cause of azaadi. These ex-militants in Kashmir inhabit a nebulous space between being civilians and yet being viewed as militants by the state. Deep crevices mark their uncertain lives, which are an upshot of their past association with militancy. Their prospects of economic, political and psycho-social reintegration are deterred by the lack of recognition of their status by the state and the apathy and insensitivity of the community. Hardly any non-governmental organisation or community-based organisations are working towards alleviating their deplorable conditions. The identity of their Pakistani wives and children remains in a state of delirium since they are treated as outsiders by the state and also by some locals or community members. The ex-militants and their families are consigned to a life that hangs before them like an unfading malaise, devoid of economic security, and political and social inclusion. Endnotes 1 Gwen Robinson and Iain Crow, Offender Rehabilitation;Theory Research and Practice, sage publication, London, 2009, p2 2 Merriam Webster Dictionary, G&C Merriam CO.(United Sates of America: 2016), 3 Malknthi Hettiarachchi, Sri Lanka s rehabilitation program: the humanitarian mission two, Prism Journal for complex operations, NDU, Vol4, Issue2, Messey University, North Newzeland, 2014, p11. 4 A term in Urdu language, used to define a war like situation in which people are involved in abundance. 5 Personal Interview with an ex-militant (name withheld) affiliated with Aljahad, 11 March 2016, Hydergund, Shopian. 6 Personal Interview with an ex-militant turned Ikhwani (name withheld), 18 March, 2016, Zainapora, Shopian. 7 Promise of Paradise that didn t come true, The Hindu, 16 April, The Times of India,15 August, Personal Interview with, the ex-militant of Hizb-ul- Mujahideen (name withheld), 14 January 2016, Sofipora, Shopian. 10 Musharraf s speech, 12 January, 2002, The Dawn. 11 The Nation, 18 January, 2oo4. 12 Dna, 11 April, The Pioneer, 8 April, In Kashmir a militant who once joins militancy and if he surrenders is termed by society as third class militant. 15 Personal Interview with an ex-militant, (name withheld), 19 December 2015, Gulzapora, Pulwama. 16 Personal Interview with an ex-militant (name withheld), of Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, 7 March 2016, Qaimoh, Kulgam. 17 The Global World Post, 22 June, JK Government Order No. Home 1376 (ISA) of 2010, Dated: 23 November The Hindu, 16 April, Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), 12 April, 2016, Katroso, Kulgam. 21 Most of the militants don t know about rehabilitation policy and would misconceive it as Aman Ki Aasha which differs from it but has many things in common such as reconciliation and peace. 22 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), 2 February, 2016, Kansa Sangdi, Bandipora. 23 Returnees got impressed by this initiative, which as per paper invites them to reintegrate with their families they left during 1990 s militancy movement. They happened to be believers of talks between India and Pakistan to end the conflict. 24 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), 9 March, 2016, Batmaloo, Srinagar. 25 Personal Interview with a lady from Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, (name withheld), she lost her mother 9 months ago, 11 January, 2016, Barzullha, Srinagar. 26 Personal Interview with a victim,( name withheld), who would state how he has sold his all possessions in Pakistan after listening about the wrongly conveyed message of the financial and other assistance related things included in the policy, 11 January, 2016, Barzullha, Srinagar. 27 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), he held that I and other three families visited Indian embassy and other offices meant for it. The officials there guided us that go anywhere else to seek help and we can do nothing, 22 February, 2016, Batmaloo, Srinagar. 28 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), who brutally castigated the security forces for their corrupt outlook. He adds that I had no money to reach home after getting looted by the men in uniform, 10 January, 2016, Narbal, Budgam. 29 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), 18 November, 2015, Batergam, Kupwara. 30 Personal Interview with an ex-militant, (name withheld), 14 December, 2015, Zainpora, Shopian. 136 World Focus July 2017

137 31 Sameer Yasir and Meha Dixit, Rehabilitation Policy: A Field Study of Ex- Militants, EPW, Vol. LI No 53, December, Personal Interview with a returnee returned under this policy (name withheld), decoding how security forces have a larger share in decision making. The policies are less mixture of civil government suggestions and more of military involvement, 14 March, 2016, Batmaloo, Srinagar. 33 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), 13 February, 2016, Arwani, Anantnag. 34 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), who is subject to cases pending and trials are being held in Jammu which costs him huge expenses and energy. He is a daily wager and every trail costs him 2000 rupees, 13 February, 2016, Durpora, Shopian. 35 The wife of a returnee (name withheld) calls Kashmir a cold hell where she calls herself victim of it. While criticizing political environment, she adds that people cast votes and in turn getting deceived to the bad extent. She adds people are worse than government as for as their behavior is concerned towards us. She is a mother of three daughters and a son. All three daughters are brutally efficient in studies, continuing their studies on the compromised certificates. In 2015 year two of her three daugh ters scored 95% and 94% marks in 10 class exam, 18 January 2015, Molchitrgam, Shopian. 36 Mushaal Malik (Pakistani born) is wife of chairman JKLF, Mr. Yasin Malik 37 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), denouncing government and separatists for their ill behavior to end their plight. He held Yaseen Malik was caught along with weapons and I am the one who came as a normal citizen, if his wife can come to Kashmir and then back to Pakistan what is wrong with my wife and children, 4 February, 2016, Akhran, Kulgam. 38 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), 18 November, 2015, Batergam Kupwara. He considers himself guilty of plight his family is suffering from. The wives and children didn t want to come back but we and religious obligation forced them. 39 Personal Interview with a returnee (name withheld) on, 13 May, 2016, Ganderbal. 40 Personal Interview with Chairman Haqeeqi Movement, Ahsan-ul-Haq. This is an organization constituted by all these families to fight their war of rights and duties, 15 April, 2016, Soura, Srinagar. 41 Personal Interview with a returnee, ( name withheld), who desperately represents those colleagues who want job and asks a question to government of India and Jammu and Kashmir don t deprive them of documents to join any job. He adds that our children and we can t even work in private sectors, 10 April, 2016, Khrew, Pulwama. 42 As per their interview every head of a family was receiving 2500 per month. Their children were given reservation in professional and other institutions followed by employment. 43 Trust deficit which is the result of threat between people and state was and is bone of contention killing all steps towards peace, reconciliation and resolution. The same thing is employed to this policy leaving hundreds of families stranded. 44 Personal Interview with daughter of Returnee, (name withheld), 22 November, 2015, Turkwangem, Shopian 45 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld). He talks of old traditions when Jammu and Kashmir was symbol hospitality and now everything has undergone change. Collectivism and hospitality are no more realities in Kashmir, 8 March, 2016, Bijbehara, Anantnag. 46 Personal Interview with a son of returnee, (name withheld), who talks in a much needed style as for as the new conflicts are concerned. He would say that threats are more and security is less and we as a community are more insecure and sleepless. We are a generation who sees its course of life moving nowhere, 15 April, 2016, Soura, Srinagar. 47 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), who feels there is no need of radicalization. If our children are continuously underestimated, they will get radicalize voluntarily, 19 March 2016, Khanda, Budgam. 48 Personal Interview with a wife of a returnee, (name withheld), who blatantly criticized the language of natives, 9 February, 2016, Beerwah, Budgam. 49 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), who crossed LOC three times narrates the then treatment of those who stood against state and now the ill treatment they are receiving, 29 April, 2016, Kokernag, Anantnag. 50 A 55 year old returnees wife, (name withheld) from Pakistan Administered Kashmir narrates the story of change which has swayed the concept of respecting militants and hazardously ill treatment of government. She adds when my husband first time came from here to other part of Kashmir, there he held that we are heroes of Kashmir, 18 March, 2016, Barzullha, Srinagar. 51 In Kashmir, the youngsters who did join militancy never lose the name militant and if they surrender are subject to stern public criticism. 52 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld), he is victim of atrocities at the hands of family and society. After coming back his family denies him the share of property, 22 March, 2016, Alam Gunj, Shopian. 53 Personal Interview with the family of returnee, (name withheld), Main Town Sopore, Baramulla, 24 March, Downtrodden section in Indian society, who are not allowed to mingle with other castes in their daily business. It is a social practice not backed by law. 55 A group of people who do not or do own home and are associated with profession of sheep, goat, ass and horses. They have their own language to communicate. They wear long beard and cover heads with cloths. These people mainly live in hilly areas. 56 Personal Interview with children of a returnee, (name withheld), 1 May, 2016, Keeri, Baramula. 57 Personal Interview with a returnee, (name withheld) who explains how arrangements are made for Pandits and how returnees from PoK are neglected despite knowing their acceptance of Indian constitution and integration, 4 March, 2016, Kader, Shopian. Rehabilitation Policy:A Field Study of PoK Returnee Militants 137

138 Growing Presence of China in Pak Occupied Kashmir and India s Concerns Shobhit Kumar Jain Introduction China and Pakistan have very long all weather friendship. The strategic cooperation between china and Pakistan is continuing to be stronger. Balancing India in South Asian region is the major fact making their bond stronger. 1 China has been providing various types of economic and military cooperation to Pakistan. Many development projects have been provided in the disputed territory of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). PoK constitutes Pakistan occupied part of Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit- Baltistan region. A part of PoK has been handed over to China by Pakistan. India claims PoK to be a part of Jammu and Kashmir state of India and illegally occupied by Pakistan. Activities by Pakistan and China in PoK are strategically motivated. 2 China is expecting to fulfil its economic and diplomatic interests. The geopolitical location of PoK is important for China to get connected with the rest part of Asia. PoK has vast opportunities to mining industries and hydropower. China wants to explore natural resources of PoK. Therefore, Gilgil Baltistan region of PoK has been included in the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project. Although, growing development projects of China in PoK have raised many concerns of India. India relates it with the sovereignty of India. Presence of China can be a threat to the security of India. China s interests can confront Indian interests in South Asia. China s presence has made bilateral dispute between India and Pakistan a trilateral issue between India, Pakistan and China. 3 Recently, a massive protest has been demonstrated against Chinese development projects in Gilgit Baltistan. Residents of Gilgit Baltistan have raised many objections on growing activities of China in PoK. China has been exploiting natural resources like minerals. A large number of Chinese labour are working in development projects which led to the reduction of employment opportunities of the local people. Many civil society groups have raised 138 World Focus July 2017 objection over environment degradation due to economic activities. Land has been forcefully acquired and the people are forced to migrate. People are agitating such forceful displacement. Another issue of concern is that the major beneficiary of development project will be either Pakistan or China. PoK will not get proper benefit according to its participation in the projects. No consultation has been made with local leaders prior to give permission to China to establish projects in PoK. Agitations and allegations show that the real intention behind the development projects is diplomatic and not in the favour of local people of PoK. Therefore, development projects by China are not altruistic in nature but strategically and commercially motivated. China has been projecting development aid as a tool to expand its influence in South Asia and Central Asia. Also China is willing to expand its access to raw materials and consumer markets. Development Projects by China China has been investing in various sectors in PoK. The major sectors to get benefit from Chinese are transport power and mining sectors. Chinese company China Road and Bridge Corporation is upgrading Karakoram highway increasing width from 10 metre to 30 metre. Road from Jaglot to Skardu having 165 km distance has been built by china. In Gilgit- Baltistan region 135 km Thakot- Sazin road is being developed by china 4. China and Pakistan are jointly developing a highway connecting Keil to Bhimbher. A rail link is being established between Havelian to Khunjareb further it will be linked to the Kashgar of Pakistan. A joint venture named Pakistan China Sust Port Company is managing the Sust dry port, some 200 km from Gilgit on Karakoram highway along China border. 5 China has constructed 16 airstrips on the Karakoram Highway, primarily for military purposes. This would be important for enhancing Pakistan and China s strategic airlift capabilities and ensure smoother logistical support. China is also involved in telecommunication sector. A 820 km long

139 Optical Fibre Cable is being laid along the Karakoram Highway by China. China has established many hydropower plants in PoK. Neelum- Jhelum Hydropower plant and Kohala hydropower plant are set up in Muzaffarabad. korrak hydropower plant is located at the border of Punjab and PoK. Bunji hydropower plant is established on Indus river near Gilgit. Some dams like Diamer- Bhasha dam on Indus river, Mangla dam and Satpara dam have also been established. China has been developing a $ 62 billion CPEC project. CPEC will have a vast transit system including highways and railways spanning length and breadth of Pakistan. In the corridor, many power plants and Special Economic Zones will be constructed. 6 Corridor will connect Kashgar city of China to Gwadar port of Pakistan. Corridor is intended to boost the economy of Pakistan by modernising infrastructure and transit systems. CPEC is known as corridor of opportunities in Pakistan. 7 For Pakistan corridor would be a game changer. 8 CPEC is a part of China s One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative. OBOR is an ambitious trade route initiative of China which will connect China with Europe passing through Central Asia and West Asia. OBOR is known as silk route. China is willing to connect it with maritime silk route. Through CPEC, China can connect OBOR with maritime silk route at Gwadar port. 9 In PoK, Gilgit- Baltistan region has a large stock of metallic and non- metallic minerals. Chinese companies have invested in this region to explore minerals. Hunza- Nagar district has many Chinese uranium mines. Chapusaran region has molybdenum mines while Astore district has copper mines. Many gold mines have also been set up by Chinese companies. Strategic Interests of China China has been developing projects keeping its own strategic motivations in its mind. Development projects have been selected as they will ultimately fulfil strategic interests of china. China is interested in the geo political location of PoK. PoK has borders with Pakistan, India, china and Afghanistan. PoK has strategic location between three nuclear power countries China, India and Pakistan. PoK s strategic location shows that any country can easily access to the three major regions of Asia through PoK which are South Asia, East Asia and Central Asia. China can easily control terrorist activities happening in the western parts. Major terrorist groups have links with PoK. China can tighten its security and can control illegal infiltration. China is willing to expand its access to Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean. Development of Karakoram highway will allow china to enter into Pakistan more easily as the time of travelling will be reduced. Through Pakistan, china can make its presence in the Arabian sea and in the Indian ocean as well. China s has promoted its policy of string of pearls to encircle India. To encircle India china needs to increase its presence in north and west of India. By renovating Gwadar port of Pakistan in Arabian Sea China has already encompassed India in the west. Karakoram highway will let China to complete its string. China along with Pakistan can easily patrol on the border with India through Karakoram highway and railway line. Heavy army vehicles, tanks and weapons can be easily transformed to Pakistan if the conflict between India and Pakistan rises. China is also increasing number of its military personals in PoK. China is also trying to balance India in the South Asian region by expanding its access to PoK. For China, India is a rival country to its interests in the region. India has great political, economic and cultural influences in the region. China is willing to support Pakistan to balance India. Therefore, china needs to increase its military, diplomatic and economic support to Pakistan. Economic Interests of China China s economy is growing rapidly. A large amount of investment has been made in infrastructure, energy and manufacturing sectors. China has a big population. China is transforming into an urbanised, industrial economy. Fastest growing economy results into a rising demand for energy, raw materials and foreign markets for exporting finished goods. China requires a dense connectivity with the rest part of the world for investing surplus money and consumer markets. China is willing to take advantage of the geo strategic location of PoK. Through PoK, china Growing Presence of China in Pak Occupied Kashmir and India s Concerns 139

140 can enter into the markets of South Asia and Central Asia. PoK has natural prosperity. Natural resources mountaineer and remote areas are yet to be explored. A huge amount of minerals and water is available in PoK. PoK has lack of industrialisation and urbanisation. As a result natural resources are yet to exploit. China is expecting to exploit minerals and water reservoirs of PoK. China s development projects are motivated to fulfil china s demand for raw material for industrial sector. Apart from the minerals PoK has the vast capacity to produce hydropower. Many rivers originate from Himalayas are flowing through PoK. Mountainair region is suitable for producing hydropower. China is expecting to use surplus energy to fulfil its future demand for energy. Therefore, China is sponsoring hydropower projects in PoK. Through PoK China can connect itself with Central Asian countries. Central Asia is known for huge natural resources and large consumer market. A huge amount of natural oil, gas and minerals are found in Central Asian countries. Through Central Asia, china can connect itself with gulf countries and Europe. China can get cheap raw material for rising Chinese industries. A long trade route to Europe will make China able to easy access to the markets of Europe. It will increase foreign trade of china. CPEC is a way of China to get connected to Gwadar port. Through Gwadar port China can easily trade with Arabian countries and African countries. India s Concerns India has many objections on Chinese activities in PoK. PoK is a disputed territory between India and Pakistan. PoK was integral part of erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir which was merged into India. PoK is a part of Jammu and Kashmir state of India illegally occupied by Pakistan. Pakistan has transferred a part of PoK to the China ignoring the United Nations resolution. Growing economic activities by Pakistan and China without resolving disputes is objectionable to India. According to India, Chinese and Pakistani interfere is the attack on the sovereignty of India. 10 India has expressed objections over CPEC project because it includes Gilgit- Baltistan region of PoK. Another issue of concern of India is that china is increasing its military presence in PoK. Pakistan and China are jointly patrolling on the border. Through Karakoram highway China is transferring military vehicles and weapons to Pakistan. China has also deployed military to insure the security of the ongoing development projects and power plants. 11 Presence of Chinese military in PoK is a big threat to the security of India. Himalayan region has been working as a security wall between India and China. Economic activities like hydropower plants, roads, railway line will make Himalayan region no longer as security wall. Increasing activities will also make PoK more suitable to trespass by terrorists. Terrorist activities will be motivated and will grow more easily. India has always been target for the terrorist groups supported by Pakistan. Illegal infiltration to India will rise. India is also worrying about China s policy to encircle India. China is increasing its presence in the neighbouring countries surrounding India. China has developed Chittagong port in Bangladesh, Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka and Gwadar port in Pakistan surrounding India s sea coast. China is establishing railway lines and roads passing through PoK under the policy of string of pearls. China is willing to encircle India from the north. China is intended to get connected with Gwadar port of Pakistan by highways passing through PoK under CPEC project. Gwadar port will allow china to be present in Arabian Sea. China is willing to increase its influence in the Arabian Sea. China can watch out trade and other economic activities in the Arabian Sea as the major sea route from Europe to East Asia passes through Arabian Sea. Arabian Sea has many mineral like oil, petroleum and natural gases. China will have easily access to exploit minerals in the Arabian Sea. India has a long coastline along with the Arabian Sea. Many Islands of Lakshadweep are located in the Arabian Sea. India has been actively conducting many economic zones, exclusive export zones and naval bases in the Arabian Sea. China may confront Indian interests in the Arabian Sea. Therefore, India will have major security threats if china s increases its strategic projects. 140 World Focus July 2017

141 Summary China has been emerging as a leading economy as it has become second largest economy after United States. Chinese economy needs to be more connected with the various parts of the world. A good connectivity can led to increase foreign trade and economic influences. Therefore, China is eager to explore new markets for its industrial products. Growing demand for energy, oil and petroleum and minerals has forced China to search new areas with affluent natural resources. South Asia is the region which can connect china with central Asia, Gulf Countries and Africa either through land or sea ways. PoK has natural resources yet to exploit because of lack of industrialisation. China required to be connected PoK with China on the one side and with Pakistan on the other side. Through Pakistan China can use Arabian Sea to get connect with Gulf Countries and Africa. But China s presence in PoK is disputed as PoK is illegally occupied by Pakistan. There is a need for resolving PoK dispute first. Residents of PoK must be consulted before any kind of offer to China. India has raised concerns over CPEC project because of sovereignty issue. China s military deployment in PoK can produce security threat to South Asia region. A peaceful environment can be established in South Asia only after resolving PoK dispute. 12 References: 1 Malhotra, A The Red Shadow in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, Scholar Warrior. 2 Chansoria, M China Makes Its Presence Felt in Pak occupied Kashmir, Sunday Guardian, Available at china-makes-its-presence-felt-in-pak-occupiedkashmir (Accessed on ). 3 Choudhury, R. A India and the Pakistan- China Nexus in Gilgit- Baltistan, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses Available at idsacomments/indiaandthepakistanchinanexusin GilgitBaltistan_archaudhuri_ (Accessed on ). 4 Malhotra, A The Red Shadow in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, Scholar Warrior. 5 Kasturi, B Facts About Chinese Presence in POK, Available at d ia ndefe n c erev iew. c om/inte rvie ws/ factsaboutchinesepresenceinpok/ (Accessed on ) 6 Malik, A Why is the China Pakistan Economic Corridor such a challenge to India? The Economic Times, Publshed on Ibid. 8 Shah, F Does the China-Pakistan economic corridor worry India?. Aljazeera. Available at chinapa kistanecon omic corridorworryindia html (accessed on ). 9 Jaiswal,P. And Paul, A China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: Should India Worry? Analysis, Eurasia Review, Available at w w w. e u r a s i a r e v i e w. c o m / chinapakistaneconomiccorridor shouldindia worryanalysis/ (Accessed on ). 10 Sahoo, P China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Unacceptable to India: Shivshankar Menon, The Indian Express, Available at article/india/china-pakistan-economic-corridorunacceptable-to-india-shivshankar-menon / (Accessed on ) 11 Choudhury, R. A India and the Pakistan- China Nexus in Gilgit- Baltistan, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses Available at idsacomments/indiaandthepakistanchinanexusin GilgitBaltistan_ archaudhuri_ (Accessed on ). ANALYSIS OF INDIAN DIPLOMACY, FOREIGN POLICY AND STRATEGIC AFFAIRS CONVERGE AT WORLD FOCUS. Growing Presence of China in Pak Occupied Kashmir and India s Concerns 141

142 Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: A Case of Prolonged Negligence Vijay Kumar Yadav The story of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) displays a tale of a territory which formally belongs to India, both legally and historically but has been under a continuous occupation by Pakistan for around last 70 years. The Indian state has largely remained nonchalance on the matter and as a result the axis of Pakistan and China in this region has challenged the Indian territorial sovereignty over PoK. The aim of this paper is to analyse the Indian stance and response on PoK since its occupation by Pakistan. It also examines the contemporary geo strategic importance of PoK in the wake of the initiation of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) mega project. Introduction Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) was previously part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, which ceased to exist as a result of the Indo- Pakistani War of also known as first Kashmir war. Pakistan launched tribal militias and Pakistani irregular forces to invade the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir in order to occupy it. Later the regular Pakistani forces also joined militia groups. The ruler of the state subsequently acceded the state to the union of India. Afterwards India sent its troops to evict the intruders from the state of J&K. However Indian troops had neutralized almost two third of the state territory, India went to the United Nations in the hope of a fair and legitimate solution, which would resolve the armed confrontation between the two countries. Soon India realized that in the prevailing scenario of cold war politics, it would never get fair justice. India went ahead with its own policy of ascertaining the will of the people of J&K through democratic means. A constituent assembly was elected by the people of Jammu and Kashmir which drafted a constitution for the state and ratified the accession of the state to the Union of India on February 15, PoK is part of the greater Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) region consists of the so called Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan. Hence institute an integral part of India and therefore It has been under the illegitimate control of Pakistan since October 22, To this day one part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir continues to be under illegal occupation of Pakistan while the other part remains with India after accession. India has continued to maintain that PoK is a legitimate part of the Indian Union. Why Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is Crucial for India? Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) as the name suggests is the territory which was occupied seventy years ago and since then maintained by Pakistan. It is important for India because sovereignty is one of the most important virtues of a modern nation state and PoK is the sovereign territory of India. Pakistan maintains its dominance over the vast area, including the so called Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) and Gilgit-Baltistan (referred to as the Northern Areas till August 2009) 1. Presently approximately one third of the territories of the state of Jammu and Kashmir are in de facto control of Pakistan. These are not the territories received by Pakistan by the partition of the Indian subcontinent but was captured by it illegally. In the year 1947, soon after the partition of the British India the options ahead of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir were, to merge with India, to merge with Pakistan or to stay independent. Before it could have decided for its future it witnessed an invasion from Pakistan. By occupying the Northern territories of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan has gained a strategic lead for itself. The region shares borders firstly with the state of Pakistan, which makes governance simpler for Islamabad. Then it shares border with the Wakhan Corridor of Afghanistan, 142 World Focus July 2017

143 after the capture of PoK Pakistan disconnected the only existing land linkage between India and Afghanistan. To the West, PoK shares boundaries with Tajikistan which forms the source of historical linkage between India and Central Asia. Lastly, to the North are the territories of the Xinjiang province of the People s Republic of China. The strategic location of the Pakistan occupied territories answer the question why PoK is important for India? Apart from these reasons Pakistan is also interested in sticking to its position in PoK as China is seeking strategic depth in the region 2 to extend its overall influence in the region, adding to that PoK is rich in natural resources which Pakistan has been exploiting since the occupation. In the present scenario too, Pakistan has been taking full advantage of the PoK by bartering it with China, developing infrastructural project, highways and railways in it. These developments have been totally without negotiating with New Delhi thus mounting the illegality committed by the state of Pakistan on these disputed territories Pakistan Occupied Kashmir since 1947: Changing Dynamics and Critical Developments On 1 January 1948, India took the issue of Jammu and Kashmir to the United Nations Security Council. And on 21 April 1948, the Council passed a resolution calling for Pakistan to withdraw all its regular and irregular forces from all of Jammu and Kashmir and India to progressively reduce its forces to the minimum level required for law and order. Following which a plebiscite was planned to ascertain the will of the citizen of Jammu and Kashmir. However, no withdrawal was ever carried out by Pakistan and the whole process of UN recommendations stagnated. Since then Gilgit-Baltistan and a western portion of the state called AJK have remained under the illegal control of Pakistan. 1The Karachi Agreement On 29 April 1949, Azad Kashmir was made to sign the Karachi Agreement, which was apparently kept as a secret by the Pakistani Government upto 1990s. Through this agreement Pakistan ceded all control over Gilgit-Baltistan. This is seen as an effort by Pakistan to legitimize its rule over Gilgit-Baltistan and to integrate these territories permanently into Pakistan. India was largely silent on the matter even when the fate of the people was sealed without their consultation by the central government of Pakistan. The Karachi agreement thus was alien to the people of Gilgit-Balitistan who were mistreated by Pakistan and was thus highly unpopular. From then until 1990s, Gilgit-Baltistan was governed through the colonialera Frontier Crimes Regulations. 2.The Sino-Pakistan Boundary Agreement The Sino-Pakistan boundary Agreement of 1963 between the governments of Pakistan and China was one of the critical event in the discourse of resolving the Kashmir dispute. Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 square kilometers of Indian territory in Pakistan occupied Kashmir to China 3. The agreement is controversial and therefore not recognized as legal by India. Since 1947 India claimed sovereignty over the entire area of the pre-1947 princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, and therefore maintained that Pakistan and China did not share a legal common border. Time reporting on the matter in 1963, expressed the opinion that by signing the agreement Pakistan had further dimmed hopes of settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India 4. 3.The Karakoram Highway Project The Karakoram Highway (KKH) connects Pakistan with China. It was built in 1978 with the Chinese assistance. It runs through Abbotabad in the Khyber- Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan passes through the capital of Gilgit Baltistan, Gilgit, and continues through the valleys of Nagar and Hunza, along the Hunza River. It leads to Kashgar, in the Xinjiang region of China. The KKH is about 1280 kms long and Pakistani section of the KKH is about 800 kms long and much of it (about 580 kms) runs through the Gilgit-Baltistan region of the PoK. This project has multiple strategic implications for regional security, especially that of India. As part of the recent China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), China pumped in an additional $46 billion for the renovation and reconstruction on the Pakistani portion of the Karakoram Highway (KKH). 4.Altering the Status Quo of PoK by Pakistan The territory of present-day Gilgit-Baltistan was transformed into a separate administrative unit of Pakistan in It was formed by the merger of the former Gilgit Agency the Baltistan District of the Ladakh Wazarat and the hill states of Hunza and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: A Case of Prolonged Negligence 143

144 Nagar. This move was much more than a simple administrative division for convenience but was a strategic decision to incorporate the territories of Gilgit-Baltistan permanently into Pakistan. In 1974 the Government of Pakistan under the leadership of Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto abolished the State Subject Rule in Gilgit-Baltistan which meant serious demographic changes inside the territory. Pakistani Government encouraged Sunnis from other parts of the country to acquire land and settle in Gilgit- Baltistan 5. Later in the year 2009 the Pakistani cabinet passed the Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self- Governance Order which was signed by the then President of Pakistan Asif Ali Zardari. Gilgit- Baltistan thus gained a de facto province-like status without constitutionally becoming part of Pakistan. The Growing Chinese Presence The involvement of China in PoK is not new. China has yet again got involved in the PoK through a recent, controversial project of One Belt One Road and its China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The CPEC is based in territories which belong to India and had been consecutively captured by Pakistan. The sovereignty of India is breached with the project running through PoK. India also did not attended the forum meet of OBOR in May, 2017 due to this reason. However, surprisingly this is not the first development and infrastructure project China has had in the PoK territories of Kashmir. The Karakoram Highway is about 1280kms. long highway project that connects Abbotabad in the Kyber-Pakhtunwa province of Pakistan with Kashgar in the Xinjiang region of China. 6 The Chinese companies have been involved in PoK on a number of small and big projects. Both the countries signed MoUs on cooperation for development of hydel, thermal and solar energy projects, and for promotion of river fisheries. In September 2009, Pakistan signed an agreement with the People s Republic of China for a major energy project in Gilgit-Baltistan which includes the construction of a 7,000-megawatt dam at Bunji in the Astore District 7. These developments in Pakistan occupied Kashmir has remained totally bilateral in nature between Pakistan and China. What is worth noting is that neither India nor the people and government of PoK which Pakistan refers as Azad Kashmir was consulted. Pakistan has ignored the resentment of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan against increasing Chinese penetration into their area. The people of PoK had registered their protest when Pakistan ceded the Trans Karakoram Tract to China in The people of the region fear that if the current pace of Chinese penetration is sustained then China may completely take over Gilgit-Baltistan. In a New York Times article written by Selig Harrison, he states that at least Chinese troops have been stationed in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of the PoK 8. Conclusion The socio-political and economical circumstances in PoK highlight the harsh realities of misrule and neglect of the region. The popular resentment against Pakistan is increasing day by day. The demographic equation of PoK has changed significantly since its occupation by Pakistan. Moreover, Chinese and jihadi footprint adds another strategic dimension to the discourse on PoK. The Sino-Pakistan boundary agreement was an illegal land deal which diluted India s long-term security and economic interests. Against this backdrop, India s response to these events has been rather lukewarm. Therefore it is absolutely essential and prerequisite for Indian policy makers to adopt a proactive approach towards PoK which is an integral part of India. It should also try to reshape and mobilise international opinion against the non-democratic and unlawful occupation of PoK by Pakistan since 1947.So far there has been little effort from India to clearly define its objectives on PoK which it regards as an integral part of its territory. India needs to reassert its claim on PoK as per the 1994 Parliamentary Resolution 9. There is a greater need for India to clearly define its strategic objectives with regard to PoK. India also needs to take note of the changing dynamics of PoK and make a serious synergetic effort to shape and orient the debate on Kashmir in its favor. Endnotes 1 Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, IDSA (2011), Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: The Changing 144 World Focus July 2017

145 Discourse, IDSA PoK Project Report, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: files/book/book_pakistanoccupiedkashmir.pdf 2 Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, IDSA (2011), Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: The Changing Discourse, IDSA PoK Project Report, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: files/book/book_pakistanoccupiedkashmir.pdf 3 Press Trust of India (2006), China illegally occupying land. accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: fullstory.php? newsid= Time (1963), Pakistan: Signing with the Red Chinese, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: / c o n t e n t. t i m e. c o m / t i m e / m a ga z i n e / a r t i c l e / 0,9171,870184,00.html 5 Singh, Sushant (2015), Those troubled Peaks, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/thosetroubled-peaks/ 6 Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, IDSA (2011), Pakistan Occupied Kashmir: The Changing Discourse, IDSA PoK Project Report, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: files/book/book_pakistanoccupiedkashmir.pdf 7 Khan, M. Ishmail (2009), Gilgit-Baltistan autonomy, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: web. archive. org/web/ / Harrison, Selig S. (2010), China s Discreet Hold on Pakistan s Northern Borderlands, accessed on 9 June, 2017, available at: 27/opinion/27iht-edharrison.html 9 Parliament Resolution on Jammu and Kashmir dated 22 Feb 1994 communicated the following points: The State of Jammu & Kashmir has been, is and shall be an integral part of India and any attempts to separate it from the rest of the country will be resisted by all necessary means; India has the will and capacity to firmly counter all designs against its unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity; and demands that - Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression; and resolves that - All attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of India will be met resolutely. Accessed on 10 June 2017, available at: satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/ d o c u m e n t / p a p e r s / parliament_resolution_on_jammu_and _Kashmir.htm GET CONNECTED TO THE INTRICACIES OF GLOBAL STRATEGIC AFFAIRS THROUGH WORLD FOCUS WORLD FOCUS OLD ISSUES FROM 2009 TO 2014 ARE AVAILABLE AT 50 % DISCOUNT Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and India: A Case of Prolonged Negligence 145

146 Contributor s Profile Anil Kamboj I.G.(Retd.) Former Senior Fellow, IDSA & Professor at NDIM, New Delhi Prof. Snehalata Panda Former Emeritus Professor, Deptt. of Political Science, Berhampur University, Berhampur, Odisha Dr. SudhanshuTripathi Professor in Political Science, UP Rajarshi Tandon Open University Allahabad (UP) Dr. B. Srinivas, IPS Executive Director, Security & Co-ordination, NTPC, New Delhi G. Kishore Babu Editor, World Focus & Director, Foundation for Contemporary Studies, New Delhi Dr. Alok Kumar Gupta Associate Professor, Centre for Political Studies, Central University of South Bihar, Gaya (Bihar) Dr. Gouri Sankar Nag Associate Professor and Head of the Political Science Department of Sidho Kanho Birsha University, Purulia, West Bengal Dr. Sajal Basu Senior Research Fellow of I.C.S.S.R, New Delhi, and Formerly, Fellow of Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla Dr. Netajee Abhinandan Assistant Professor, Political Science, Ravenshaw University, Cuttack (Odisha) Dr. Mohor Chakraborty Assistant Professor in Political Science, South Calcutta Girls College (aff. to University of Calcutta), Kolkata, West Bengal Dr. Saleem Ahmad Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, School of Humanities & Social Sciences (SHSS), Galgotias University, Greater Noida, U.P. Dr. Khushbu Gupta Assistant Professor, Shaheed Bhagat Singh College, University of Delhi, New Delhi Snehil Kacker Assistant Professor, Lady Shri Ram College for Women, University of Delhi Dr. Aparna Banerjee Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Serampore College, Kolkata Dr. Prasanta Sahoo Assistant Professor, Dept. of Political Science, Bharati College, University of Delhi Dr. Pitam Ghosh Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Bangabasi Evening College, University of Calcutta Pankaj Lakhera Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Swami Shraddhanand College, University of Delhi Shivani Sharma PhD Research Scholar, South Asian Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi Afroz Ahmad Phd Research Scholar, Centre For Research And Security Studies, School of International Studies, Central University of Gujarat, Gandhi Nagar Jahangir Ahmad Khan Phd Research Scholar School of International Studies, Central University of Gujarat, Gandhi Nagar Parul Khatri Assistant Professor, School Of Data Science, Maharishi University of Information Technology (MUIT), Noida, U.P. Charu Khatri PhD Research Scholar, Faculty of Education, Jamia Millia Islamia University, New Delhi Manisha Chaurasiya PhD Scholar, Centre for International Politics, Organization and Disarmament, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi Arif Hussain Malik Research Scholar, Department of Political Science, University of Kashmir, Hazratbal Srinagar, J& K Toseef Ahmad Bhat Research Scholar, Department of Political Science, University of Kashmir, J& K Shobhit Kumar Jain Ph.D. Candidate, Centre for International Politics, Central University of Gujarat, Gandhi Nagar, Gujarat Vijay Kumar Yadav PhD Scholar, Centre for Indo-Pacific Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi 146 World Focus July 2017

147 World Focus: January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 Nov-Dec (Annual Number) January 2010 February 2010 March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 September 2010 October 2010 Nov.-Dec (Annual Number) January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 Nov-Dec.2011 (Annual Number) January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 May 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 (Annual Number) December 2012 (Annual Number) January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 August 2013 September 2013 October 2013 November 2013 December 2013 (Annual Number) January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 April 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 August 2014 September 2014 October 2014 November 2014 (Annual Number) December 2014 (Annual Number) January 2015 February 2015 March 2015 April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 * May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 February 2017 March 2017 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 Japan in World Affairs* Chile : Democracy & Development* China* Pakistan India and West Asia: Development Perspectives NAM: India & Egypt* Developments in Sri Lanka* Central Asia: The Global Flashpoint* Environment & Sustainable Development* India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) Dynamics of India s Foreign Policy Af-Pak: Anti-Terror Strategies Changing Bangladesh: New Leap Forward* Climate Change: Beyond Copenhagen* US & South Asia* India: An Economic Power Why is Gandhi relevant even today? Revisioning SAARC* Russia in the changing World* China Today* Re-whetting India s Look East Policy* Emerging India s Foreign Policy* Rabindranath Tagore* Buddhism in the Contemporary World* Disaster Management in India* South China Sea Dispute: Emerging Developments* India & Neighbours (Series One) India s Neighbourhood Policy: Harmony & Development (SeriesTwo) US Policy Responses to Developments in the Arab World* Mahatma Gandhi & Gandhism* Contemporary China* Re-emergence of Russia in the horizon?* India s foreign Policy: Perspectives & Prospects* Pakistan at Crossroads* Growing Indo-Bangladesh Relations* SAARC & India* Re-energizing India - Nepal Relations* (Series I) Nepal in Transition* (Series II) Changing Equations in Asia-Pacific & ASEAN Region Contemporary Korean Peninsula Swami Vivekananda s Vision: Lessons for the 21st Century* China Today A Glance at India s Economic Growth* UPA & India s Foreign Policy (Series-1)* UPA & India s Foreign Policy (Series-2)* Asian Maritime Diplomacy* India & European Union* Energy Security: Indian Perspectives* Dr. B.R. Ambedkar & Social Justice: A National & Global Perspective* Environment and Sustainable Development* India & West Asia* India & Neighbours* M.N. Roy: The Veteran Indian Internationalist* India and Afghanistan * India & Myanmar Relations* Global Governance & Decentralization* India s Foreign Policy* Indian Diaspora* Climate Change* China in a changing * Philosophical Thoughts of Buddha, Gandhi & Dr. Ambedkar: Contemporary Relevance* Ethics & Indian Civilizational Thought: Global Implication* India & ASEAN* Disaster Management in India* India s Economic Growth* India & Neighbours * India s Quest for Energy Security* India s New Foreign Policy (Series-1)* India s New Foreign Policy (Series-2)* Oil Diplomacy in Central Asia & West Asia* Environmental Diplomacy and Sustainable Development* Makers of Modern India* India s Economic Diplomacy* Energy Security Needs of Rising India* India & China Relations* Conflict Zones of the World* India & Neighbours* Regional Diplomacy: SAARC, ASEAN & BRICS* Climate Change* India s Foreign Policy - Series 1* India s Foreign Policy - Series 2* Global Politics of Oil in West & Central Asia* Terrorism and Geopolitics* India and East Asia* India s Economic Diplomacy Disaster Management & Mitigation* Global Turmoils: Peace & Conflict Management* Ethics in the Contemporary World* India & Neighbours* India s Maritime Diplomacy and China Silk Road* Climate Change* India s Foreign Policy: Series -1* India s Foreign Policy: Series -2* Russia and the World* Redical Islam & Terrorism* From Pacific Atlantic to Indo-Pacific Region: Shifts in Global Politics* One China Principle and Trump s U.S. Strategy* Gandhi, Bose & Dr. Ambedkar* Environment & Sustainable Development*

148 D. No. (DL (E)-20/5264/ Posting date every month) RNI No. RN34710/80 Edited/ Owned/ Published and Printed by G. Kishore Babu from B-49 (Ground Floor), Joshi Colony, I.P. Extn., Delhi and Printed at Meenakshi Press 4857/24, Ansari Road, Dariya Ganj, New Delhi